Guidelines for age-based goals

Hi gang,

If there's a silly season in youth hockey, it's spring, when every youth hockey organization under the sun -- non-profit and for-profit -- holds tryouts. I'm often asked to help do evaluations during these sessions, to help avoid any suspicion of favoritism among members. And that makes sense.

But what I often think about while sitting in the bleachers, trying to keep warm and jotting down notes, is "What's most important to this organization?" Is it winning? Is it player development? Is it providing a fun environment for everyone? It's obviously a complex question, with many potential answers. To find out what's most important to a particular program, start by figuring out what the organization's goals are. Then you can apply those to the goaltenders in the program. Here are some guidelines that I'd recommend.

Thanks for reading. As always, let me know what you think.
Best, -Brion

##

GUIDELINES FOR AGE-BASED GOALS

One of the most difficult aspects of coaching is applying the right approach to each goaltender, at varying age levels. The reality is that not all goalies are created equal. As a result, goalie coaches have to adjust their methods based on a number of factors, including the age of the goalie, their experience, their commitment level, and their talent level.

Good coaches know there's no "one size fits all" approach to coaching. There are so many physical and mental challenges to the position that you need to assess each child (or young man, young woman, or adult) individually.

Of course, that's easier said than done. Even as an experienced coach, I sometimes need to reassess, remind myself to keep the individual in mind, and reboot.

TrueSport (truesport.org) recently ran an excellent article on just this topic, featuring sports psychologist Roberta Kraus. A former competitive collegiate tennis and basketball player who works with athletes ranging from novices to Olympians, Kraus has an impressive resume. She holds a pair of master’s degrees, one in higher education from the University of Northern Colorado and another in sports psychology from the University of Arizona. Her doctorate from the University of Denver is in communications, specializing in its application to individual and team effectiveness.

The following are the highlights from that article, tailored to young goaltenders.

Getting started

Foremost, parents and coaches need to be on the same page in terms of the overall objectives. According to Kraus, parents and coaches typically agree on the "right" answer in terms of the reasons sports are beneficial for kids: building character, reinforcing a work ethic, developing integrity, teamwork, etc. But knowing the right answer doesn't always stop parents and/or coaches from applying too much pressure on kids to win, be a star player, or live up to the investment that parents have spent on private training and travel teams. Essentially, we all need to remind ourselves that the fundamental goal is (or should be) to keep young athletes engaged in sport. Staying engaged reinforces the values parents and coaches say they want. Sports help foster and fortify exercise and nutrition habits that lead to improved health throughout adulthood. The question Kraus asks is, how can we help kids set and achieve goals in a way that keeps them engaged?

Focus on "competitive maturity," not actual age

This is such a critical element for coaches in the youth ranks. Kraus encourages parents and coaches to consider an athlete's competitive/training maturity over chronological age. For example, your team might have two 12-year-old goaltenders. One has been playing competitive hockey for four years, the other just picked up the game (or position) this season. They might be the same chronological age, but could be vastly different in terms of competitive maturity, based on playing experience. From a goals perspective, the athlete with more experience is more likely to thrive despite greater challenges compared to the more novice athlete. Coaches need to adjust accordingly.

Goal setting versus goal getting

The traits of control, self-determination, and accountability can change dramatically as an athlete progresses from elementary school through high school. For goals to be effective, a young goaltender needs to have adequate control over the factors necessary to achieve them. This is why Kraus encourages players, parents, and coaches to focus on "goal getting" instead of "goal setting." This is more than semantics. Goal getting is based on what a young athlete can achieve through effort. Goal setting is based on win/loss types of outcomes, and can depend heavily on teammates. These are real and measurable goals that children can achieve (or fail to achieve, as the case may be). But the achievement or failure is based on the only thing they can really control: their effort. Here are some examples:

Goal setting
# Win more than half our games this season
# Win the league championship
# Make the varsity squad

Goal getting

# Develop more confidence in handling dump-ins and making passes (skill acquisition)
# Faster recovery from the butterfly, or stronger lateral push (power development)
# Encourage teammates at every practice and game (leadership)

Employ words deliberately

Likewise, the words that parents and coaches use can have a dramatic impact on a young athlete. Kraus believes adults tend to be specific with criticism and vague with praise. Think about the post-game car ride home. Do you point out specific instances where your young goaltender didn't cover a loose puck quick enough, or a specific time when he (or she) was off his angles? Do you follow that up with nebulous praise for "battling" or "working hard"? Kraus said very specific criticism paints mental pictures of what went wrong, but vague praise doesn't help players to similarly visualize success. It's important for coaches and parents to be as specific with praise as with criticism. Instead of "you were aggressive," recall a specific example: "It was great to see you challenge the shooter during that breakaway late in the first period, and take away the net." You still have every right to point out areas that need improving. But consider how quickly and specifically we can identify and describe failures, and how critical it is to identify and accurately describe achievements.

Intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation

According to Kraus, parents and coaches need to understand the source of an athlete's motivation when it comes to establishing appropriate goals. Athletes motivated by internal, personal achievement have high "intrinsic" motivation (the fire within). Athletes motivated by external validation, like social status or prizes, have high "extrinsic" motivation. Both are valuable, but intrinsic motivation is crucial for long-term participation and achievement. If an athlete exhibits high intrinsic motivation early on by prioritizing personal achievement and what success feels like – rather than what it looks like – then coaches and parents can help the athlete progress by encouraging the pursuit of extrinsic goals (winning). Conversely, if an athlete exhibits high extrinsic motivation early on by prioritizing winning and elevated status that results from success, then coaches and parents should help nurture that player's intrinsic motivation before reinforcing his (or her) extrinsic motivation.

Consequences and rewards

Young athletes are more likely to tougher on themselves for failures (both perceived and real) compared to the criticisms they might get from parents and coaches, said Kraus. On the other end of the spectrum, neither young athletes nor their parents and coaches tend to praise effort or achievement to the same extent. In essence, young athletes, parents, and coaches are all biased toward criticism and negative consequences. To counter that, coaches and parents should encourage young athletes to establish concrete consequences and rewards related to effort, and not outcomes.

Goaltenders should ask themselves this question: How do I help my team by giving my best effort? This is the basis for the athlete's reward. If giving your best effort means you are constantly engaged, battling through screens, encouraging your teammates, that behavior should get rewarded (like taking them out to their favorite restaurant).

Then ask this question: How do I hurt my team when I don't give my best effort? This is the basis for the athlete's consequence. Giving up early rather than competing to the final whistle, or ripping a teammate for a penalty or defensive breakdown, are examples of you not giving your best effort. That's what you pay a consequence for (like losing Xbox or PlayStation for a couple of days).

The athlete, peers, and teammates should be the initial judges of whether an athlete earned a reward or should suffer a consequence (ensuring age-appropriate decisions). Team captains should provide input next, with coaches and parents as the last people to weigh in. That builds accountability, which is a hallmark of all great goaltenders.

FINIS

Sports without sportsmanship is a hollow activity

You don't have to be brothers - like Ken Dryden, left,
and Dave Dryden - to embrace good sportsmanship.

Hi gang,

I've been thinking about the concept of "sportsmanship" quite a bit lately, promptly by the unseemly practice of schools lobbying for their candidates for college hockey's Hobey Baker Award (really, if you're campaigning for this award, you have no idea why Baker was selected to represent college hockey's highest honor, and you should do some homework).

Sportsmanship, for me, is a critical component to playing sports. Winning is important, don't get me wrong. So is playing the right way. It's about treating your opponents, your teammates, the refs, and the game with dignity and respect. That's what this column is about.

Let me know what you think. Best, -Brion

##

SPORTS WITHOUT SPORTSMANSHIP IS A HOLLOW ACTIVITY

February represents the stretch run for most high school hockey seasons. In other words, this is the time of the season when coaches tend to get hyper-focused on winning, whether it's simply to make the playoffs, or to get a better post-season seed. Far too often, I've seen coaches lose their composure, and their sense of sportsmanship. And if a coach loses sight of the overriding values that these game are supposed to impart, what can we expect of the players?

Last spring, I watched with serious concern and consternation as a local girls hockey coach went on a Twitter rant when his team lost a playoff game, in a shootout, against a lower-seeded squad. The game-winning goal may (or may not) have been hit a second time by the shooter. Hockey fans, coaches, and refs know that, in a penalty-shot scenario, a player can't touch the puck a second time after it's shot. In this case, the refs ruled that the puck wasn't hit twice, which ended the game.

Afterward, the coach of the losing squad took to Twitter to vent. Here's a sampling:

"They blew the call and I could tell they knew it."

"The player clearly saw the puck laying there after the initial attempt, instincts tell her to tip it again. Bad bad call."

"Why are the officials out of position? Horrible."

Now, I understand in this day and age, Twitter allows people – even our highest-ranking elected official – to go complain publicly whenever they feel like it. But I was clearly disheartened by the obvious lack of class, and the total absence of sportsmanship, on display in the coach's tweets.

To make matters worse, some players on the coach's team apparently followed his lead. At least one team captain refusing to take part in the handshake line after what had been an outstanding girls high school hockey game. That's such a shame. After all, we're talking about a girls hockey game. Yes, the games are important, especially a playoff game. But that's exactly when sportsmanship is supposed to trump bad behavior.

The more important the game, the higher the stakes, the more sportsmanship should matter. That's why Hobart Amory Hare "Hobey" Baker is a genuine hero of mine.

Baker, who played hockey and football at St. Paul's School in New Hampshire and Princeton University, was so supremely talented that he drew special attention from his opponents. Many of those opponents took liberties, and at a time (early 1900s) when hockey was incredibly rough, Baker took a beating. But he didn't retaliate. Instead, Baker was the epitome of "letting his play do the talking." After the game, he would visit the opponents' locker room to shake hands with each player.

Following his graduation from Princeton, where his team won two national championships, Baker joined the St. Nicholas Club in New York. During the 1914-15 season, when he led the club to national amateur championship, arenas advertised games by posting "Hobey Baker Plays Tonight," which embarrassed him. Baker would plead with sportswriters to highlight the club, not him.

In 1991, the great Sports Illustrated writer Ron Fimrite said this of Baker: "Through his Spartan example, he imposed a code of behavior on athletes, particularly college athletes, that was accepted, if not faithfully observed, for the better part of four decades. It is now, alas, as forgotten as the dropkick. In the Hobey code, for example, a star player must be modest in victory, generous in defeat. He credits his triumphs to teamwork, accepts only faint praise for himself. He is clean-cut in dress and manner. He plays by the rules. He never boasts, for boasting is the worst form of muckery. And above all, he is cool and implacable, incapable of conspicuous public demonstration."

Sadly, the Hobey Baker Memorial Award Foundation has lost sight of what made Baker great. They've ignored his legacy by turning the award into a popularity contest. School sports information offices churn out marketing material for their candidates, an act that would make Baker cringe. It is the antithesis of what he stood for, which is that no one player was any more important than any other. Baker was all about his team, which, somewhat ironically, is what made him legendary.

A general lack of sportsmanship not only impacts how we deal with opponents, and officials, but also how we treat our teammates. When there's an overall erosion of the values of the game, the fabric that binds a team can fall apart. Conversely, when players put the team first – a basic tenet of sportsmanship – great things can happen.

Here's an example. I'm not using real names, because I haven't asked for parental permission to tell this story. But it's a great story about a player putting his team's interests before his own. "Jack" has worked with us at Stop It Goaltending for at least eight years. And when I say "worked," I mean he busted his tail, and parlayed that work ethic into a chance to play for a solid New England prep school program.

By his sophomore year, Jack appeared to be on track to be the team's starter. But injuries, and the emergence of one of his goalie teammates, derailed that plan. By his senior year, he was resigned to a spot on the bench. Still, Jack continued to strap on his gear, every day, pushing his teammates in practice, making the team better. It paid off, and his squad made the New England prep school playoffs.

That's when Jack was confronted with a gut-wrenching decision. Sitting together in the locker room before the team's first playoff game, the starting goalie confided he had forgotten his skates. The kid was crestfallen, and presumed Jack would take his spot in the net. Jack, though, didn't blink. He knew that he and the starter wore the same skates, and the same size. He also knew the starter had earned this game.

So Jack gave up his skates, and watched as the starter led his team to a win. But I've never been more proud of Jack, and I'm sure his parents were as well. I'm guessing his teammates, and his coaches, felt the same.

More recently, the NCAA college football championship game served up another prime illustration of selflessness, and sportsmanship. Trailing Georgia at halftime, Alabama coach Nick Saban pulled long-term starter Jalen Hurts, a sophomore. Hurts entered the game having won 26 of 28 games over the past two seasons, but was benched after completing just three of eight first-half passes, replaced by freshman Tua Tagovailoa. And the freshman delivered, passing three second-half touchdowns, including the stunning game-winner in overtime.

But what grabbed my attention throughout the second half of the game, and in the celebration following Tagovailoa's heroics, was the dignity that Hurts displayed.

"As a team player, you have to do what's best for the team," Hurts told ESPN. "It was important for me to be true to myself and be the team leader I have always been. Don't change because of a little adversity."

Novelist James Lane Allen said: "Adversity does not build character, it reveals it." Hurts has character in abundance. That, more than his championship ring, makes him a winner. Just like "Jack." Just like Hobey Baker.

FINIS

Parents, school officials must respect boundaries

Hi gang,

I'm revisiting a column that I wrote a year ago, because we're heading toward hockey playoffs, and tensions between parents, school officials, and coaches always seem to ratchet up this time of year. That's especially true in this case, when a parent who happened to be a school official (a superintendent, no less) went way over the line in disciplining his son's coach.

Hockey, and the dynamics surrounding the game, are complicated enough without a parent in position of power having a personal vendetta against a coach. There's simply a right way and a wrong way to handle disagreements. This is an example of the wrong way, by any standard that I know.

Let me know what you think! Best, -Brion

##

PARENTS, SCHOOL OFFICIALS MUST RESPECT BOUNDARIES

Sigh! Seems like every time I want to focus on a basic goaltending topic – from techniques to game preparation – something happens that pulls me in another direction. Recently, it was the suspension of Andover (Mass.) High School hockey coach Christopher Kuchar and two assistants for alleged mistreatment of their players.

Sheldon Berman, superintendent of Andover schools, took that action after saying Kuchar prohibited players from eating for 12 hours after a loss. That charge, on its face, was absurd (seeing the away game was, at most, only two hours from Andover). Berman said he was acting on complaints from parents, some who had contacted the state's Department of Children and Families.

Then the story gets really bizarre. Seems two years earlier, Berman wrote a memo to Andover Principal Philip Conrad and former Athletic Director Don Doucette, chastising Kuchar for the treatment of Berman's son, Dale. Obviously, I can't go into every detail of a six-page memo (yup, six pages!); it's easy enough to find it online. Suffice to say, Berman's memo is a classic example of parental overreach. Considering that it came from the superintendent of schools, addressed to two men who work for him, Berman's memo borders on egregious.

Dated March 28, 2016, Berman's memo starts: "I would like to express serious concerns about Coach Christopher Kuchar in his role as Head Coach of the Andover Ice Hockey Team. My concerns are twofold. On the one hand, I believe his coaching style is not one that is aligned with the larger interests of the Andover Public Schools. On the other hand, I believe his treatment of my son falls close to the category of abuse."

What followed was a six-page character assassination of Kuchar (and a bloated ode to Berman's son), ending with the superintendent recommending that Doucette fire the coach. "It is my belief that Andover would serve students far better with another coach," wrote Berman.

The memo, frankly, is mind-boggling. It's a particularly vile bit of skullduggery, because Berman sent it privately to two men who not only answer – directly or indirectly – to him, but also have a direct say in Kuchar's employment. And I'm not the only one who thinks so. Some 40 Andover parents recently attended an Andover School Committee meeting looking for answers. According to published reports, Andover Selectman Bob Landry said the bigger issue wasn't the coaches, but Berman's questionable behavior.

"It is remarkable to me as a School Committee that you are ignoring the elephant in the room," Landry told committee members. "You have evidence now that the superintendent of schools wrote a six-page memo to two subordinates encouraging them to terminate the Andover High School hockey coach in clear retaliation for how he felt his own son had been treated. How that doesn't warrant an investigation by you immediately is beyond me."

The crowd applauded, but School Committee member Shannon Scully accused Landry of grandstanding.

"We can't entertain personnel matters in open meeting," she said. "This will be dealt with in executive session. If you don't mind getting off of your soap box that would be fantastic."

First, Ms. Scully, you CAN entertain personnel matters in an open meeting. This is a classic dodge that public boards use to avoid conducting public business publicly. There are exceptions that allow boards to meet in private, or "executive session." Here is the first one, per the state's Open Meeting Law Guide: "To discuss the reputation, character, physical condition or mental health, rather than professional competence, of an individual, or to discuss the discipline or dismissal of, or complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual."

Note the phrase "rather than professional competence." Landry was specifically questioning Berman's professional competence. I agree. Berman was completely out of line with his memo. Now, you can say the " discipline or dismissal" phrase applies, but that doesn't prevent committee members from suggesting an open hearing with the coach and the superintendent. Did you ask, Ms. Scully?

If Kuchar or Berman decline, you then assure your constituents (yes, you work for them) that the full minutes of the "executive session" will be released once the issue is resolved, per state law. Your community deserves complete transparency.

Second, if you don't like people getting up on a soapbox, Ms. Scully, be more forthcoming. This isn't on Bob Landry. This is on the members of the Andover School Committee. Residents have every right to question whether the committee fully investigated Berman's memo. For it to come out in the press feeds that suspicion.

I've had this happen to me, though on a much smaller scale. I am an Old School coach who believes in working hard while we're on the ice. I owe that to my goalies, and to their parents and/or their program, who foot the bill. I also like having a good time. There's almost always a lot of laughter and good-natured ribbing during my sessions. My favorite students are those who can smile while working their tails off.

But I'm also the first to admit that my approach is not a one-size-fits-all. I welcome conversations with parents, especially if they think my style isn't working for their child. I can handle it. My only goal is to make sure my students gets the maximum out of their ability. Having fun is a close second, and important, but it's not my top priority. If that rankles a child, or parent, they need to talk to me, so I can understand what their priorities are. From there, I can adjust. But if parents take a backhanded approach, there's little I can do.

Two years ago, one of my bosses asked about a particular student. The young man had told his father that I made him feel bad about himself, and he didn't want to work with me. The father (who didn't attend the sessions) didn't contact me; he contacted my boss. When asked about the student, I answered honestly. I couldn't remember treating this young man any differently than any other student. I wasn't even sure what behavior I was answering for. But I was disappointed that neither the student nor his father brought their concerns to me.

Likewise, I'm a parent. My two daughters played varsity sports through high school, and my eldest continues to play collegiate volleyball. My wife (also a coach) and I haven't always seen eye-to-eye with the coaches that our girls have played for. But when we've had issues, we addressed them civilly, respectfully, and directly with their coaches. Not after games, or practices, but usually over coffee.

In short, it's okay if you don't agree with everything your child's coach does. But there's a right way to address those concerns. Don't do what Superintendent Berman did. That was the very definition of cowardice. He tried to leverage his position to oust a coach he didn't like. There's no place for that in youth hockey, or high school hockey. Berman, and the Andover School Committee and school officials, need to take a long, hard look in the mirror.

FINIS