Is coaching high school really for the kids? Or is it to fuel our egos?

Honestly, it's both.

You'd be hard pressed to find a coach that is in it for the long haul that doesn't get a ton of joy out of seeing kids improve and taking satisfaction in knowing that he/she was a major contributing factor to that improvement.

Plus, over the years, as I've gotten to know other coaches, I know who brings a solid program every year, occasionally gets lucky with a talented class, and who will bring a crappy team. I take some personal satisfaction in knowing that my teams have matched up against, and beaten those teams coached by quality coaches that are good year in and year out.

I do it for the big babysitting paycheck!

You pose an interesting question.

I’ve coached cross country and track for 22 years, and, although I have bitter, long standing rivalries with other coaches in my district and state, I’d say we’re all doing our best for our athletes as the main priority.

Some coaches are super vocal—like everything hinges on what they’re saying. You get sick of their voices by the end of the meet, and there is no correlation between how much they say and how well their runners perform. Some show up with a new embroidered coat with the resume on the back every year.

Whatever. I agree with CoachB. It’s high school coaching. Most of the coaches are teachers. The others are passionate and make big sacrifices to coach kids..

More selfless than ego, as I see it.

I've always wondered about this myself. I graduated from high school in 2008 and my HS XC/TF head coach was an eccentric, intense, and capricious man. I still live in the area along with numerous ex-teammates who I'm still close with and the general sentiment I get from these guys is that they generally view him negatively. When we were younger and more naive, we all definitely bought into his program and the high mileage/high intensity it demanded.

Invariably, most of the team would break or burn out while the final seven would qualify for state, but be too banged up by then to place well. My more talented teammates always seem bitter as if they never reached their full potential. I was always JV, but operated under the delusion that there was some hidden reservoir of talent deep down that I just hadn't unleashed yet. I know now that I was just a very mediocre athlete and that was perfectly fine from a holistic point of view.

If I had to sum it all up, I'd say it was a mixed bag. I appreciate the fact that our coaches took the time they did to run the program and it did afford us all the opportunity to learn about the "vicissitudes of life" (hyuk hyuk) , but I also see how their priorities were trivial in the grand scheme of things ("Gee, missing morning practice is akin to being a youth thug/druggie?) and their treatment of athletes was petty and immature (saying some guys looked like shiz, were like girls, stupid, etc.).

Personally, I'm glad I had the experience as I learned a lot and developed a love for fitness and threshold for pain/discomfort that has served me well on life, even if I was only a bit player in some weirdo's vanity project.

Some clues to ego driven coaches:
- do they seek the spotlight?
- do they claim responsibility for success?
- do they talk about their own accomplishments?
- do they talk about technical aspects of training, making it sound like success is because of their plans?

Some clues to those in it for the kids:
- do they stay in the background when their teams and athletes succeed?
- do they give the praise to their athletes for success?
- do they talk about athletes characteristics that aren’t related to performance, such as leadership ?
- do they talk about culture more than training details?

Check out the team roster size. Big teams with a wide range of ability usually shows the coach makes it a great experience for all kids. If the team is small in proportion to their school population, it usually means the coach only wants to deal with good runners because it makes them look good.

---

in my humble opinion... wrote:
Some clues to ego driven coaches:
- do they seek the spotlight?
- do they claim responsibility for success?
- do they talk about their own accomplishments?
- do they talk about technical aspects of training, making it sound like success is because of their plans?

Some clues to those in it for the kids:
- do they stay in the background when their teams and athletes succeed?
- do they give the praise to their athletes for success?
- do they talk about athletes characteristics that aren’t related to performance, such as leadership ?
- do they talk about culture more than training details?

---

My son’s coach does it for himself. He uses the kids to help him train for the marathons he runs. That’s what their workouts and mileage is based on. If the kids have a big meet he often times isn’t there because he’s running his own races. If he needs a recovery day or day off, the kids run on their own. During the short track season, he was training for a marathon. My kid who runs the 1600 was putting in 16 mile runs. He’s a worthless coach who doesn’t care about anyone but himself.

I'm not a coach yet, but I am strongly considering becoming my old school's middle distance (Our school considers this the 400/800 800/1600 types) coach.

This is because our coaching for middle distance has become rather poor over the last few years and I see tons of 52, 2:05, 4:40 kids come and go that would totally be running 50 1:55 4:15 if they were only trained properly.

I want to coach in order to get those kids to their max potential. So many kids running average times at meets because of their 25 miles a week and over-lifting, that could absolutely blow entire fields away under the coaching of someone that has even half researched how to improve at running.

---

in my humble opinion... wrote:
Some clues to ego driven coaches:
- do they seek the spotlight?
- do they claim responsibility for success?
- do they talk about their own accomplishments?
- do they talk about technical aspects of training, making it sound like success is because of their plans?

Some clues to those in it for the kids:
- do they stay in the background when their teams and athletes succeed?
- do they give the praise to their athletes for success?
- do they talk about athletes characteristics that aren’t related to performance, such as leadership ?
- do they talk about culture more than training details?

---

Yes it's complicated and a combination of a lot of things. Look at how coaches react after championships. Do they dominate the spotlight or do they allow their athletes to shine? Is it about their system or the talented hardworking athletes

---

CoachB wrote:

---

in my humble opinion... wrote:
Some clues to ego driven coaches:
- do they seek the spotlight?
- do they claim responsibility for success?
- do they talk about their own accomplishments?
- do they talk about technical aspects of training, making it sound like success is because of their plans?

Some clues to those in it for the kids:
- do they stay in the background when their teams and athletes succeed?
- do they give the praise to their athletes for success?
- do they talk about athletes characteristics that aren’t related to performance, such as leadership ?
- do they talk about culture more than training details?

---

This is a good post, but you can do the former to a small extent and still be more geared toward athlete improvement.

The OP gave me a good chance for some introspection. So for me personally

-I don’t seek the spotlight, but I don’t always defer when complimented either. If someone compliments me on my team being good, I usually just say “thank you, we’ve all put in a lot of effort”. If they specifically compliment me on the consistency of my teams performances, I’ll usually point out that it’s the kids that actually have to do the workouts. If the follow on compliments are something to the effect of, “well, you designed the program that they follow, I usually just say thank you” in all instances, I feel gratified.

- I often talk to my athletes about the accomplishments of past teams and individuals. I do this in the context of what the teams had to do to be successful and point out that it takes a combination of talent and hard work to reach the highest levels, but that every team has enough talent to be competitive at the local level. I try to frame previous successes as being more dependent on the work teams have put in and I love to point out that talent is not always readily apparent. I also try to reward improvement more than results. For example, my biggest compliments are reserved for the kids who were slow when they started at Hughson, but have seen massive improvement. We run a series of time trials during the summer and pre season and the lists I publish are ordered by who has improved the most rather than by who ran the fastest. I spend more time talking about the kid who was fat and taking 22 minutes to run 2 miles as a freshman but got down to 5 flat as a senior than I do about the kid who ran 4:30 as a senior after starting out at 5 flat as a freshman.

At least 5 times a year, I get asked by my anatomy students (that’s my primary teaching assignment) if my knowledge of the body gives me an advantage over other coaches. I answer yes. When we study muscles, circulation, or respiration, I try to tie much of what I’m teaching to sports physiology. Mostly I do this because most of my students play sports and it’s a good hook to get them interested in the subject, but also some of my runners are invariably in the class as well and when I physiologically detail the adaptations that take place during a given workout, I feel it gives them confidence that they are getting well designed training and that they will share that sentiment with their teammates.

I talk about culture a ton. Over the past 5 years, culture development has become the dominant aspect of what I try to do team wise. I feel that a lot of the stuff I described above leads to a good team culture.

I realize that I said I a lot in this post, but as stated before, there is a bunch of personal satisfaction derived from knowing that I am a difference maker for these kids.

So yeah, it’s complicated

---

---

CoachB wrote:

---

in my humble opinion... wrote:
Some clues to ego driven coaches:
- do they seek the spotlight?
- do they claim responsibility for success?
- do they talk about their own accomplishments?
- do they talk about technical aspects of training, making it sound like success is because of their plans?

Some clues to those in it for the kids:
- do they stay in the background when their teams and athletes succeed?
- do they give the praise to their athletes for success?
- do they talk about athletes characteristics that aren’t related to performance, such as leadership ?
- do they talk about culture more than training details?

---

This is a good post, but you can do the former to a small extent and still be more geared toward athlete improvement.

The OP gave me a good chance for some introspection. So for me personally

-I don’t seek the spotlight, but I don’t always defer when complimented either. If someone compliments me on my team being good, I usually just say “thank you, we’ve all put in a lot of effort”. If they specifically compliment me on the consistency of my teams performances, I’ll usually point out that it’s the kids that actually have to do the workouts. If the follow on compliments are something to the effect of, “well, you designed the program that they follow, I usually just say thank you” in all instances, I feel gratified.

- I often talk to my athletes about the accomplishments of past teams and individuals. I do this in the context of what the teams had to do to be successful and point out that it takes a combination of talent and hard work to reach the highest levels, but that every team has enough talent to be competitive at the local level. I try to frame previous successes as being more dependent on the work teams have put in and I love to point out that talent is not always readily apparent. I also try to reward improvement more than results. For example, my biggest compliments are reserved for the kids who were slow when they started at Hughson, but have seen massive improvement. We run a series of time trials during the summer and pre season and the lists I publish are ordered by who has improved the most rather than by who ran the fastest. I spend more time talking about the kid who was fat and taking 22 minutes to run 2 miles as a freshman but got down to 5 flat as a senior than I do about the kid who ran 4:30 as a senior after starting out at 5 flat as a freshman.

At least 5 times a year, I get asked by my anatomy students (that’s my primary teaching assignment) if my knowledge of the body gives me an advantage over other coaches. I answer yes. When we study muscles, circulation, or respiration, I try to tie much of what I’m teaching to sports physiology. Mostly I do this because most of my students play sports and it’s a good hook to get them interested in the subject, but also some of my runners are invariably in the class as well and when I physiologically detail the adaptations that take place during a given workout, I feel it gives them confidence that they are getting well designed training and that they will share that sentiment with their teammates.

I talk about culture a ton. Over the past 5 years, culture development has become the dominant aspect of what I try to do team wise. I feel that a lot of the stuff I described above leads to a good team culture.

I realize that I said I a lot in this post, but as stated before, there is a bunch of personal satisfaction derived from knowing that I am a difference maker for these kids.

So yeah, it’s complicated

---

The answer:

Yes

---

Future Coach wrote:
I'm not a coach yet, but I am strongly considering becoming my old school's middle distance (Our school considers this the 400/800 800/1600 types) coach.

This is because our coaching for middle distance has become rather poor over the last few years and I see tons of 52, 2:05, 4:40 kids come and go that would totally be running 50 1:55 4:15 if they were only trained properly.

I want to coach in order to get those kids to their max potential. So many kids running average times at meets because of their 25 miles a week and over-lifting, that could absolutely blow entire fields away under the coaching of someone that has even half researched how to improve at running.

---

We won a lot when I was coaching—state titles, NXN regional, etc. The road to all of those wins was thrilling and intense, and the kids and I both learned quite a few things. The road to the losses—we had bad years in there too—was also intense, and the kids and I both learned quite a few things. It was extremely important to me to try to be good at coaching, and heck yes I had an ego. Now that I don’t coach I am thankful more for the great relationships I have with former athletes and many of their parents, which leads me to believe it was beneficial for both of us.

Definitely a good post and a lot of great responses here which surprises me in a nice way.

I get excited every time one of my athletes or a team I coach accomplishes something that they might not have without me being involved. I loath coaching awards and anything and everything else that places me and not our team in the spotlight.

However, in contrast to some of what is being said here, in order to be an effective coach I do believe you need to come across confident and knowledgeable. If not, your athletes will likely go elsewhere for training advice or worse they will not believe in yours. I noticed this to be increasingly true as kids rely more on information from the internet now than they did just 15 years ago.

Discussing training theory with athletes can come across as being ego driven but most of the coaches that I have met that seek knowledge are not trying to impress anyone, it's more that they do not want to let their athletes down. So, I disagree that a defining trait of the ego driven coach is someone that discusses training and applied science.

Ultimately, as coaches at the high school level we are building human beings that are learning how to lose and win with integrity. They are also learning to work with others to a common goal. All, among other things are very valuable life lessons.

We also have an obligation to provide opportunities for kids to maximize their potential to attempt to open the doors for them as they look past graduation. Sometimes this actually means leaving your ego behind in search of specialists in that athlete's event. I have had athlete's win scholarships and go to very prestigious colleges because I brought in a throw coach, a jump coach, etc. They were able to get that athlete to excel inn ways In would not have been able to. You have me thinking though because leaving my ego behind to bring someone in to get my athlete to an Ivy League school for example might be stroking my ego also so who knows?

---

Future Coach wrote:
I'm not a coach yet, but I am strongly considering becoming my old school's middle distance (Our school considers this the 400/800 800/1600 types) coach.

This is because our coaching for middle distance has become rather poor over the last few years and I see tons of 52, 2:05, 4:40 kids come and go that would totally be running 50 1:55 4:15 if they were only trained properly.

I want to coach in order to get those kids to their max potential. So many kids running average times at meets because of their 25 miles a week and over-lifting, that could absolutely blow entire fields away under the coaching of someone that has even half researched how to improve at running.

---

---

otter wrote:

However, in contrast to some of what is being said here, in order to be an effective coach I do believe you need to come across confident and knowledgeable. If not, your athletes will likely go elsewhere for training advice or worse they will not believe in yours. I noticed this to be increasingly true as kids rely more on information from the internet now than they did just 15 years ago.

Discussing training theory with athletes can come across as being ego driven but most of the coaches that I have met that seek knowledge are not trying to impress anyone, it's more that they do not want to let their athletes down. So, I disagree that a defining trait of the ego driven coach is someone that discusses training and applied science.

?

---