Coach in the know,???

You're not the first and won't be the last person to have a cheap shot at Neil on this forum.

You seem to think a lot about Paul Arnott ask him how a coach that intimidates and humiliates players could run a succesful ITC program for over 10 years.

I would like to answer your question BUT.

Every age, division and gender will react differently to the same style of coaching.

So really its a stupid question.
At least it matches your stupid examples.

If I'm wrong about you and you really are a "coach in the know" you would be able to tell me why both Neil and Paul are soft spoken at trainings.

PS
I you changed your alias to post this q you shouldn't have bothered because its obvious who you are.

is this someone taking my name in vain ??

I agree - this rates up there with - "Is a round basketball better to practise with than a square one?"

Neil is not perfect but that is a really cheap shot and Isaac ought to delete the thread

"Coach in the know" has probably never played under Neil before. Ask his State 16 Boys team he took back in 2002 and you might be pleasantly surprised.

It's my experience anyway with people in charge that those at the top have got there by having to be a hard-arse sometimes - he expects the best because what gets picked are the 'best' - and if Neil has had to be one in his position, well, results speak for themselves, right? (Brett Maher, Brad Newley to name a few).

-----------------------

Personally, I've had a lot of coaching styles over 10 years or so of District ball - the best kind of coaches are those that get to know the players, they are the best years for coaches and players - more fun is had by all.

As mentioned above, there are plenty of 'styles' of coaching, all work at different times with different people. Some people respond to a 'nice guy' who encourages with positive reinforcement. Others would manipulate those kind of coaches. A 'hard line' approach works for some people, but then you run the risk of just working someone over too hard, and breaking their spirit.

Basically, there's no answer to that question. Every coach is different. They have different philosophies on the game, they read games and individuals differently, and they have different teaching methods. There's no right or wrong. I think the best thing you can do as a coach is (as Libertine says) get to know your players and find out what they react favourably to.

Best coaches are usually (there are exceptions!) former players. Same goes for referees.

Best coaches are those that appreciate players for their strengths and are able to make the most out of sometimes limited talent.

Best coaches concentrate on defence first.

doctor,

i think you will find it is much easier to teach defence than offence. coaches who teach defence first usually come out second best. take the 6ers for example, they play very little srtuctured defence and they have 3 Championships in 6 years and we know their philosophy.

yeah, teams that play good d usually come out second best - just like in the Sixers/Kings game last Wednesday . . . (sigh)

I think the game starts at the defensive end. If you work in D, to cause stops or long offences, the offence will then work itself out, providing basic O priciples are installed.

sciurus hudsonicus,

My post was not a cheap shot at Neil, I was simply stating my postion on his coaching style. I never said that he was bad coach nor his style was wrong - just a simple example of a different coaching style. My opinion of Paul Arnott as a coach is "he does well with the right team" I don't disagree with any coaching styles, I was just trying to get an indication what players prefer in a coach and how coaches prefer to coach.

If you can't give any positive or constructive points then don't bother writing at all. And you have no idea who I am...

I wasn't talking about teaching structured team defence. I was talking about stressing the importance of defensive fundamentals.

I know its been said a thousand times, but things like good boxing out, good help D and ability to read a players' strengths and defend accordingly win games.

5 good defenders will always beat 5 good offensive players who don't play D.

Like Deak said, look at the Kings game. No D played. CJ gets lay-ups all night. The Sixers are a very talented Offensive team, but when their D is on, they are great to watch. Their fast break game goes into overdrive.

Also what about coaches that a load and vocal but are positive and point out faults. Seems like a pointless topic

And i know who started this forum topic!

Coach in the know,

"If you can't give any positive or constructive points then don't bother writing at all"

Thats rich coming from you!

Yes, you never said he was a bad coach.
But how many good coaches humiliate and intimidate junior players

NONE!

You're right I don't know who ya are, just thought your post echoed one I read a week or so ago.

I do have constructive points but not the time to post them.
will soon.