Turnaround Coaches: Study their Steps
April 27, 2016
By Scott Westfall
MSU Institute for the Study of Youth Sports
Turnaround leadership is often a popular topic within sports conversations, as many coaches are revered for their ability to transform a struggling team into a “winner.”
Turnarounds often are discussed in platitudes such as, “That coach has what it takes to turn this program around.”
While often talked about during the offseason, especially in the face of coaching vacancies, turnarounds are difficult to achieve. After all, if transforming a failing team into a successful one were an easy task, there would not be such an abundance of teams that struggle year-in and year-out.
As much as turnaround coaches are celebrated for their abilities to turn a losing program into a winner, very little scientific research has been devoted to analyzing coaches who have proven themselves as turnaround specialists. The steps and intangibles necessary for achieving a coaching turnaround have remained undetermined as this topic had never been examined from a scientific perspective – until now.
For the past year and a half, I have devoted the majority of my time to researching turnaround leadership in high school coaching, undertaking this study as the topic of my doctoral dissertation project. Research participants in this study included 11 high school football coaches from the state of Michigan who led dramatic turnarounds at their high schools within the last decade. The criteria for participant selection were:
• Prior to the coach’s arrival or appointment as head coach, the team finished (at least) three of the previous four seasons with a losing record (below .500 winning percentage), including a losing season immediately before the coach’s arrival or appointment.
• Within five seasons of the coach’s arrival, the team enjoyed (at least) three winning seasons (above .500 winning percentage).
Before their turnarounds occurred, these high schools had not experienced a winning season (on average) in 7.2 years, while five of the 11 schools had never qualified for the MHSAA Playoffs. However, upon being hired, the average time it took the coaches to achieve a winning record was 1.73 seasons. Moreover, the average time it took the coaches to qualify for the MHSAA Playoffs was 1.82 years. On top of this, each of the 11 teams qualified for the playoffs within three years of hiring their new coach.
The circumstances these coaches faced when they arrived were challenging to say the least, as all of the coaches entered a negative situation with poor team culture. These situations were characterized by losing streaks, cancelled seasons, dilapidated facilities, poor role models on the previous coaching staffs and a significant amount of parental pushback. Players and community members often were embarrassed by their football program. One coach described the situation by recounting, “During that time they were a doormat; everybody’s homecoming, a laughing stock. They were like the Bad News Bears.” Additional problems included low numbers, very little player development, and a low amount of commitment to the overall program.
One coach that I interviewed compared entering a turnaround situation to building a well. He stated, “You may not have success on the surface initially, but if you dig nice and deep and build the well right, there is water down there. It’s going to be some work and it might not come up right away – it takes some pumping. But if you build it right, it will happen.” In this article I will attempt to encapsulate 16 months of research, 191 pages of interview transcriptions, 2,278 miles driven across the state of Michigan, and countless hours spent with 11 turnaround coaches, in order to present to you the nucleus of what it takes to turn around a failing high school program.
The coaching philosophies of the majority of the coaches were characterized as “educational athletics.” This involved coaches striving to do things the right way, viewing their job as an extension of the classroom, implementing a character development program, and using football as a vehicle to teach life skills to players. Furthermore, their greatest strengths were revealed to be coaching/leadership skills, along with the ability to develop strong relationships with their players.
Coaches unanimously agreed that upon their arrival immediate changes needed to be made to the team’s culture. These changes included prioritizing team workouts, altering visible elements like the organization of practices, offensive and defensive schematics, team logos, along with placing positive role models in front of the players. Other changes to team culture happened through improved coach-athlete relationships, giving players a better football experience, and purging the program of negative people. One coach used the term, “Weeding the roses,” which means getting rid of the negative people in the program in order to let the better parts grow and prosper.
All of the coaches developed some type of vision for their program. The most common visions involved transforming their team into a top-level program, and for their players to conduct themselves as quality human beings. Winning games, competing with the best teams in their division, and playing for MHSAA championships marked becoming a top program. While winning was a major component of the coaches’ visions, developing quality human beings was revealed to be just as essential. This was evident as several coaches remarked that their most well-behaved kids were also their most productive players, and that doing things right in school and in the community often equates to wins on the football field.
To build upon their visions, each of the coaches formulated some type of plan or “blueprint” to execute their turnarounds. The majority of the coaches’ plans were constructed around developing positive coach-athlete relationships and employing off-season strength and conditioning programs. While all of the coaches’ plans eventually yielded a great amount of success, not all parties bought into them initially. Some of the players needed to see proof that the team could win games before they were completely sold. In order to create buy-in, the coaches used various approaches to connect with players and sell their plan. These methods included team activities, cultivating relationships with players, continuously selling their vision, hiring/retaining quality assistant coaches, and entering the situation with some sort of previous expertise. Although it may take time, the coaches stressed the importance of the players buying into their vision. As one of them decreed to his team, “The quicker you buy in, the quicker we win.”
Early indicators that a turnaround was commencing included winning games or making significant strides off of the field through positive coach-athlete relationships. Sources of sustained changes included a win streak or an increased level of commitment from the players. Clear indicators that the program had undergone a turnaround included the players adopting a new mentality filled with trust and confidence, along with the program reaching unprecedented levels of success, such as competing with the best teams, completing an undefeated season, and/or making the playoffs consistently.
Character development emerged as a strong component of this study, as 100 percent of the coaches reported that it played a significant role in fostering turnarounds. The coaches also indicated that they deliberately teach character in practice and use coaching as a platform for character development.
In hindsight, an outside observer may assume that these coaches were destined to succeed and their plans were met with little resistance. However, after examining their roads to turnaround success, most of them met several barriers along the way. Early obstacles included widespread mental challenges among players such as a lack of confidence and/or trust. Other early barriers included parental pushback and some cases of overt interference. After the turnarounds were complete, the coaches’ problems did not disappear; they simply changed form, as complacency became the new problem on the team. A potential root of this complacency was the addition of younger players who thought that success would happen automatically simply because of the program’s prior achievements.
The coaches were quick to acknowledge that the turnarounds would not have been possible without the excellent support they received. Their greatest source of help came from their assistant coaches who contributed both tangible and psychosocial support. Tangible support was seen through the assistants performing administrative duties and overseeing strength and conditioning sessions. Meanwhile, psychosocial support came in simple ways, such as listening, giving advice, and showing belief in the head coach. As one coach stated, “You’re only as good as the people you have around you.”
Team turnarounds are not officially complete until a team maintains the success it has built. In order to avoid complacency and sustain momentum, the coaches recommended that coaches and players find ways to keep reaching higher. In order to do this, coaches recommended talking to players about their team goals and what they want their legacies to be. To help sustain momentum, coaches stressed that it is often the little things that matter the most, such as effort, team discipline, player accountability, and positive attitudes.
The strongest theme that emerged from this study was the importance of coach-athlete relationships. All of the coaches believed that relationships are imperative to fostering turnarounds. It was also emphasized that relationships are crucial for sustaining long-term success. In essence, coaches may experience some momentary success by taking shortcuts with superior talent, however, strong relationships are the “X-factor” that will sustain the program over the long run. While the approaches of building relationships were diverse, what mattered most was coaches spending time with players in both structured and unstructured team activities, and simply showing players that they cared about them as people as much as they did as football players.
Steps of a Turnaround
(When turnarounds happen, they usually happen in this order)
1. Establish new leadership
2. Assemble a staff of positive role models
3. Gather information about the program
4. Create the vision
5. Make a plan and communicate it
6. Create buy-in from players and other key people
7. Change behavior – This is the impetus of the turnaround
8. Create and celebrate early wins
9. Don’t let up – Keep setting new goals and reaching higher
10. Complacency is the enemy: Make sure change sticks!
Intangibles Checklist
(These are the little things that people cannot see or do not talk about, yet they often matter the most)
1. Positive relationships between coaches and players. Build these by spending time with players and showing them you care about them as a person.
2. Establishment of a strength and conditioning program. All successful turnarounds were led by coaches who implemented a respectable offseason training program.
3. Display an undeniable belief that your vision and the plan will produce successful results. Continuously sell your plan and give players the reasons behind why you do what you do. Be prepared to stand tall and adhere to your vision when adversity strikes.
4. Generate player buy-in through team activities. Remember that sports are supposed to be FUN. Plan structured and non-structured activities to generate fun, excitement and team cohesion!
5. Demand excellence of your players off the field. Promote educational athletics and use your platform as a coach to teach character and life lessons to your players.
6. Outwork your opponents in everything you do. Arrive earlier. Stay later. Go above and beyond what your competitors are doing. Set the tempo that hard work is the new norm and it starts with you.
7. Remember that the little things matter. Take the time to ensure that your team always has the right effort, attitude and discipline, as well as accountability to the program and each other.
Scott Westfall spent 10 years as a teacher, coach, and athletic director in Fort Collins, Colo. He is currently finishing his Doctorate at Michigan State University, with an emphasis in Sport Psychology and Athletic Administration, and assisting the MHSAA with its student leadership programs. Westfall is a former athlete who participated in football, wrestling, tennis and cross country at the high school level, and rugby at the collegiate level. Please feel free to contact Scott if you would like a copy of his full dissertation. Scott also performs speaking engagements at conferences on various topics within educational athletics. He can be reached at [email protected]
Taking a Healthy Approach to Sports
By
Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor
November 8, 2013
During election years, it’s a familiar rallying cry: “Four more years! Four more years!”
It’s become commonplace following the third quarter of football games around the country for members of the leading team to march down the gridiron with four fingers raised on one outstretched hand as teams switch ends of the field to signify, “Fourth quarter is ours; finish the job.”
The number four also is significant in education with school terms identified as freshman, sophomore, junior and senior years.
To that end, the MHSAA is imploring everyone involved in educational athletics to go back to school in 2013-14 with a four-year mission in mind: “Four Thrusts for Four Years.”
The goal is to attain and maintain advanced degrees in sports safety, positioning Michigan schools in the center of best practices for ensuring the health of our product and students, today and beyond.
“Just a brief look around all levels of today’s athletic landscape reveals heightened awareness of health and safety issues,” said MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts. “Interscholastic sports as a whole – and particularly school sports in Michigan – has long led the charge to employ the safest contest rules and provide the healthiest environments for our games and participants.
“But, to put it in athletic terms, we can’t sit on the lead,” Roberts added. “We can, and must, improve our games in order to guarantee their existence for future generations. That is our goal, our thrust in the coming years.”
Following are the focal points for this four-year plan:
- Implement heat and humidity management policies at all schools for all sports.
- Require more initial and ongoing sports safety training for more coaches.
- Revise practice policies generally, but especially for early in the fall season.
- Modify game rules to reduce the frequency of the most dangerous play situations, and to reduce head trauma.
The directive actually kicked off last March, when the Representative Council approved a heat management policy for MHSAA tournaments and a detailed model policy for schools. While not setting requirements for member schools during the regular season, it suggests actions based on heat index – the degree of felt discomfort derived by combining temperature and humidity measurements – that are designed to minimize the risk of heat-related illness during interscholastic participation.
The policy is mandatory for all MHSAA tournaments beginning this school year, and the MHSAA plans to monitor schools’ adoption of the plan throughout the year to determine best policies moving forward.
Laminated cards containing the policy and heat index chart were printed and mailed to schools in June and continue to be disseminated at statewide meetings this fall. Two publications, Heat Ways and Safety Blitz, were published, mailed and posted to MHSAA.com, heightening awareness of healthy practice regimens, and schools have been offered discounted psychrometer prices through the MHSAA to assist in their efforts to properly monitor weather conditions.
“This action was significant; but it’s just the next step in a continuous series of actions being taken to make school sports as healthy as possible for students,” said Roberts.
The MHSAA’s proactive movements toward a safer tomorrow are taking place concurrently, rather than sequentially. While the heat and humidity plan is the most developed of the four “thrusts,” other initiatives are underway. Today’s climate prompts such action.
From the NCAA’s new “targeting fouls” to the NFL’s “crown” rule, and of course Major League Baseball’s Biogenesis/PED debacle, the headlines off the field in August centered on protecting the games rather than simply playing them. Like it or not, it’s the type of news fans need to get used to as their favorite sports audible to option plays in order to steer clear of the endangered species list.
The situation can’t be overstated. Athletics at all levels has been approaching a crossroads for years, and the time to heed the signals has come.
“Let’s make one thing abundantly clear: The people in charge of football at all levels are wise to craft rules that make the game safer, even if those rules will be controversial,” wrote Andy Staples for SI.com College Football on July 23.
The story continued: “As more information arrives about the long-term dangers of the headshots football players absorb at the high school, college and pro levels, something has to change. The next few years will be messy. The game needs saving, because if it continues as it has, it will get decimated by lawsuits and by parents of young children who decide the potential adverse effects aren't worth the risk.”
When kids stop playing, numbers at the high school level and beyond are bound to diminish as well. To trumpet the vast benefits of interscholastic football while easing parents’ minds on safety concerns, the MHSAA formed a Football Task Force in the spring of 2013. The task force is the first of several to be convened during the next four school years, and the objectives of each are to promote the sports involved as safe, low-risk, competitive athletics through the development of better practice policies and modification of playing rules.
“These task forces will be central to the overarching mission of preserving sports for years to come,” said Roberts. “We believe the MHSAA Football Task Force has set a foundation on which to build. Our discussions involving revised practice policies have reached the draft stage, and we intend to have formal proposals ready to present to the Representative Council in March 2014.”
The work of the 13-member task force – made up of football coaches and school administrators from around the state – will be reviewed by the Michigan High School Football Coaches Association, the MHSAA Football Committee and at the MHSAA League Leadership meeting for fine-tuning prior to reaching the Council.
“It is important that we provide opportunities for children to participate in interscholastic athletics and crucial that we do all we can to ensure they will be safe when they do,” said Football Task Force member Tammy Jackson, principal at East Jordan High School, who has a sports medicine background. “The MHSAA has taken an active role in promoting safety by convening the Task Force to examine current rules and consider modifications to further protect children.”
With so much publicity concerning football safety, the football group was a natural to become the first of several task forces to be assembled.
“We must educate the public on the benefits of all school sports,” said task force member Bill Chilman, superintendent of Beal City Schools. “In the case of football, it must be impressed upon people that it is statistically a very safe game when taught and played properly. The Football Task Force being proactive rather than reactive to this safety movement is key to promoting the lifelong values of football and all school sports.”
And within that public is a group which has the most vested concerns: the parents.
“There is more information available to the general public regarding sport and sport injuries, and unfortunately parents and kids all too often hear about the negative side of sport,” suggests Mike Bakker, athletic director at Fenton High School, and another member of the MHSAA Football Task Force. “It is imperative for the integrity of the sport of football to have coaches and administrators provide information about the safety of the game and the steps we take to keep kids safe. We must educate parents about the proper way to play the game and the signs to look for if problems arise.”
Without getting into the minutia of the new NCAA and NFL playing rules regarding use of the helmet, suffice it to say this will be an interesting fall during which to monitor penalties and their effects on injury numbers, particularly when it comes to concussions.
The rules changes have been reported and debated at the national level ad nauseam, and the mood seems to inexplicably tilt toward skepticism and criticism from the very group that would stage a revolt of epic proportions if football ever became extinct: the fans.
Case in point: six targeting fouls were called in 75 games during the opening weekend of college football over Labor Day Weekend (one ejection was overturned by replay), and the outcry began. Analysts and fans are afforded frame-by-frame replays which onfield officials do not have the luxury of seeing before throwing the flag.
Like it or not, the rules are in place. And, they have been implemented to protect the future of the game. The impetus now falls to the caretakers of the game – the officials – who no doubt will bear the brunt of disapproving masses in the stadiums. Yet, football is their livelihood too; both players and officials are expected to make adjustments.
At Officiate Michigan Day and the ensuing National Association of Sports Officials Summit this past July in Grand Rapids, the theme was clear: “The game has changed, and the officiating has to change with it.”
From NFL Referee Jeff Triplette to SEC Coordinator of Officials Scott Shaw to Big Ten Referee Alex Kemp and Fox Sports NFL Rules Analyst Mike Pereira – people who have been around the block – the message delivered was that the changes are necessary for the health and growth of football.
“We’re talking about taking out a specific type of play that, quite honestly, you didn’t see that much of before about 10 years ago,” Triplette said during a player safety panel at the NASO Summit. “They still played defense, there were still great hits. But somehow, these violent types of tackles began to get notoriety – whether it was all the ESPN highlights, YouTube, and maybe a combination of all of that stuff – and players started to celebrate those hits, and that became the goal.”
Not only can the game become safer; it might even become better by going retro. In recent comments on The Sports XChange, NFL analyst and former coach John Madden said, “You are always concerned how any change will impact the game. In this case, players are not going for the head shot, that big hit. They are keeping their heads up. Better tackling has become the unintended consequence. That's a good thing. Good for football. Good for kids watching. Players are tackling the way they are supposed to, with their shoulders and wrapping up. The big hit, the big replay had become so popular that tackling suffered.”
In high school, the most notable rule change involving helmets involves penalties for players who lose their helmets during a play. However, illegal helmet contact continues to be a point of emphasis and carries a minimum of a 15-yeard penalty as it has for many years. In the NCAA the mantra on helmet-to-helmet blows is, “When in doubt throw them out,” as the foul now carries with it a player ejection.
That is not the high school rule—yet—but officials at all levels need to be on the lookout. Kemp was quick to warn a roomful of prep football officials during Officiate Michigan Day, “We’ve been told to err on the side of safety, and these plays will result in ejection,” while also adding that such plays will be reviewed by replay officials. “That portion of the rule isn’t there in high school yet, but be ready for it; it’s coming, so when it happens in your games take notice and determine the severity.”
Which brings us to contest rules for safer play. During the next few years, various sport groups will be assembled to follow the MHSAA football task force’s lead in scrutinizing rules and developing proposals for revisions or additions to be submitted to the National Federation of State High School Associations. Initial football discussions receiving some traction involve changing the enforcement spot on post-interception penalties and limiting the number of yards teams can run up on free kicks. Before any submissions are made to the NFHS Football Committee, the task force will conduct research and present findings to Michigan committees.
“We can make changes ourselves – through MHSAA sport committees – for the subvarsity level, but our committees can only make recommendations to national rules committees for varsity level play,” explained Roberts. “Over the next four years, we will be asking our sport committees to give more time to the most dangerous plays in their sport – identifying what they are and proposing how to reduce that danger.”
While the football task force here at home is finalizing practice policy proposals targeted for implementation in the fall of 2014, Texas and Illinois are two states which launched restrictions with the opening of football this season. Spokespersons from both states indicate that coaches and school administrators have been pleased with the new formats.
Coaches no doubt will need to adjust practice itineraries and budget time wisely. Administrators need to remind staffs that the new era is dawning in the name of player safety, which is paramount to all parties.
“In game situations, coaches want our officials to throw the flag on late hits, low hits and other illegal contact,” Roberts said. “These are incidents that they have no control over. They do have control over practice time and teaching fundamentals; so let’s encourage safety measures that we can control, and employ those tactics to help the game prosper.”
Education will key the efforts to align coaches of all sports – and all levels – in the movement toward a healthy future. School will be in session during the next four years as the MHSAA implements effective and practical means for raising coaches’ preparedness. Three avenues are on the map:
First, the Representative Council mandated that beginning with the 2014-15 school year, all assistant and subvarsity coaches at the high school level must complete the same MHSAA rules meetings currently only required of varsity head coaches or, alternatively, one of the free online sports safety courses posted on or linked from the MHSAA Website that is designated as fulfilling this requirement.
Second, it is proposed that by 2015-16, MHSAA member high schools will be required to certify that all of their varsity head coaches have a valid CPR certification.
Third, it is proposed that by 2016-17, any person who is hired for the first time to be the varsity head coach of a high school team, to begin after July 31, 2016, must have completed either Level 1 or Level 2 of the MHSAA Coaches Advancement Program. The MHSAA is preparing to subsidize some of the course cost for every coach who completes Level 1 or 2.
Together, these changes will move Michigan from one of the states of fewest coaching requirements to a position consistent with the “best practices” for minimizing risk in school sports and providing students a healthy experience.
At stake in these four thrusts – whether for an administrator, coach, official, student-athlete, parent or fan – are the environments that offer so many lessons and the games for which we root.