An article (“How Insults Spur Success”)  from The New York Times’ Jobs Section,  page 9,  October 16, 2011, as told by  Peggy Payne and written by  Patricia R. Olsen, shared a story that is relevant to all of us, and more specifically, athletes.

A quote from the article is a good place to begin.

“At 62, I’m still stewing over not being chosen to attend the Governor’s School of North Carolina when I was 16. It is true that many good things have happened in my life: a happy marriage, a few books published, fulfilling years in journalism and freelance editing. But the fact remains that at age 16, I was not among those selected to spend six weeks in 1965 at the Governor’s School, a renowned summer camp for brainy teenagers. And silly as it may seem, this rejection has helped my career. That’s because there’s nothing like a little ’I'll show ’em’  to incite ambition. Many people cherish their motivational insults…The one’s that got away, never quite go away, and that’s not such a bad thing.”

I remember a story about Michael Jordon. He got cut from his high school basketball team. And the world knows what happened to his career as a basketball player. Roy Campanella, a catcher for the Brooklyn Dodgers, wanted to play a different position. But, a team early in his career, said they needed a catcher and he took the position. He took this negative experience and became a Hall of Famer. There are many stories like that in sports. What the old saying, Whatever doesn’t kill you will make you stronger. Boxers may lose a round or a match, but they need to look at the next one and let the disappointment spur them on to get off the stool and try again. They do this by saying things to themselves that are motivating – just like Ms. Payne did.

So, I decided to watch Monday night football yesterday. After trying Channel 7, I remembered Monday night football was on ESPN. I spent about three hours watching the Miami Dolphins and the New York Jets butt helmets. It was not a pretty game except for a cornerback, Revis, a few throws by Sanchez and a couple of catches by the visiting teams ends. When the final whistle blew, the Jets had won 24-6.  I made a mental note not to watch a coach’s post game interview,   if  it followed a game played by a couple of teams who had no ability to play well – especially of neither team was my team. It might be dangerous to my mental health.

For some reason, certainly not logical, I stayed in my chair and watched Rex Ryan come before the media to give his reaction to the game. What he decribed was mind bending. He noted that his team played well – yes they had started slow – but took off and was very pleased with their performance. Let me repeat, the Jets, who Mr. Ryan had crowned as Super Bowl winners, had just beaten a very poor team who had lost their starting quarterback. Now, either Rex needs a better optical perscription, he is using some kind of substance that creates hallucinations, he is struggling with a mental disorder or he is a liar. By the way, more than one causation can be true at the same time.   It’s only fair to give Rex Ryan a break – his team had lost the last three games. Maybe just winning one game made him drunk and delirious.

As he was talking, I wondered if I had to much to drink when I was watching the game. I checked my mug – herbal tea. I drank a pot of peppermint herbal tea. Wow, that stuff is sure powerful. We know that politicians are the great spin doctors. Rex should run for President. If he lost, he would still move his stuff into the White House. By the way, I know this article is focusing on one coach. But, I’ve seen so many make me feel nuts.

How is distorting the view of a football game by a team’s coach helpful to his players and to the audience that is watching and listening? Maybe it helps the coaches with their concussion symtoms. The previous day, I had watched a tape of two coaches getting into a fight with each other after the game was over. Maybe the coaches need to be side lined and examined. I know players are checked for drugs. What about the coaches? I suggest random testing of coaches for drugs, alcohol, psychological testing. If they don’t pass, please stop them from giving post game interviews.

A fan’s loyalty to a sport franchise builds like any loyalty to specific product. You wonder why a team that abandoned a City still maintains loyalty from its fans. Yes, many are angry at being left. Many other fans are in shock. But for many other fans, they are remain emotionally tied to the sports team that left them in the lurch and resides in a place very far away. What explanations can we offer for this emotional tie to a team that jilted them?

Having been a very young child in New York City in the 50″s, I was exposed to the Brooklyn Dodgers, the New York Giants and the New York Yankees. There were many things going on in my 7 year old life. My uncle took me to the Polo Grounds, my father took me to Yankee Stadium and my Aunt took me to Ebbets field. I was struck by formal pinstripes of the Yankees, the majesty of their Stadium, and the names of the ballplayers who played for them. The Giants had Willie Mays – end of story – he just was the most magnificent centerfielder – player – I ever have seen. My father had a baseball signed by Mel Ott. But, it was the Dodgers that captured my heart and soul. The signing of the name “Dodgers across the jerseys, the red numbers of the players directly underneath the name stood out, the intimacy of Ebbets Field left me feeling like I was on the field with the players, and JACKIE, CAMPY, THE DUKE, PEE WEE AND NEWK had nicknames just the kids from my neighborhood. Even though they were consistently coming in second behind The Yanks, watching Them Bums, argueing with other about which team was better was exciting and filled with irrational fervor. In 1959, the Dodgers had moved to Los Angeles and the Giants had moved to San Francisco. They had abandoned me after years of my complete loyalty. I was distraught. I went to the Polo Grounds to watch the newly formed Mets play the Dodgers. You would think that I would have cheered for the Mets – the new National League New York team. The Dodgers had the same uniform as they had the year before – except for the stupid hat with the “LA” on their cap. I found myself wanting the Dodgers to beat the Mets. Remember I was 8 years old. I had the following thought – “one day I’m going to move to Los Angeles and rejoin my beloved Dodgers.” Two decades later I did it. I had not let the Dodgers end our relationship. I was at home in Dodger Stadium. 

Loyalty to a sports team is part of our DNA. It is made up of sounds, sights, smells and all the stuff that makes us chemically connected to a sports team. This DNA structure invades our being at a time in life when we are open to all the new wonderful things in life. It is very hard to change our DNA.

It is one of the reasons why there is such loyalty to the New York Football Giants who don’t even play in New York or the New York Jets who also play outside of New York. The owners who moved those two teams kept the same name and uniform. The colors are the same. The names are the same. Fans remain committed to these teams that abandoned them.

Sports teams hook onto our DNA when we are most vulnerable they have us. We remain loyal to our team. Like the title of the Bob Dylan song says “Remain Forever Young.”

What is the real story? It is that he was contacted by the Yankee general manager at Fenway Park, home of the Boston Red Sox. What was he doing there? He was thinking of doing his resurrection up there. Also, he was considering his most holy appearance in Houston. So, why did he choose the Bronx to perform this miracle? How does $28,000,000 sound as a very good explanation.

I’m certainly a respectful appreciator of the achievements of Roger Clemens. He has been a magnificent pitcher and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. But, this latest stunt has cast a darker shadow on his image. He said his good byes and everyone wished him well. He already road into the sunset as a pitcher. Everyone cried their tears. Now he wants baseball fans to be so excited about his return.

As a child I wanted to trust my heroes. When they said something I listened. I looked to them for a moment of truth about how to conduct myself as a man. Say it ain’t so, Roger. When Mattingly said his good byes, he came back as a coach. This was a model for what life is about and how to deal with the existential realities of life. This helps children deal with the stages of development.

When Roger announced that he couldn’t resist rejoining his pals to save the team and give the fans another championship he is disingenuous. His ego could not be so large as his behavior indicates or could it be? Does he really see himself as a savior? He owes his ex-teammates and fans a more honest expression of motivation. What does this do to the morale of a team? What does it do to the kids who have been Roger Clemens fans? I am suggesting Roger is only serving Roger, not his team, his fans or baseball itself.

by Paul Schienberg, PhD

Part II: The Rise and Fall of A Professional Sports Team

Schienberg: The rise and fall of the New York Islanders is of great interest. An expansion team may be in existence for four, five, six years. Then, all of a sudden it wins the Stanley Cup (highest trophy in hockey for a team).

Potvin: In the last two years that I played we won the Cup and then they won two more right after I retired.

Schienberg: And the team came out of no where, right?

Potvin: People could see us coming because starting ….I was traded to the Islanders at the end their first season in the NHL 1972-73. At that time the Islanders went on to have the worst record in the history of the NHL up to that point. That summer my brother was drafted, Bill Torrey, a genius, general manager, recruited Al Arbor was recruited to become the coach. Al was the best coach I ever had. He and Scotty Bowman were the best coaches that ever coached hockey.

Schienberg: So, when Arbor came in, whatever talent had begun to be there, he added to the significant pieces to that team?

Potvin: What happened was that my brother was drafted with Bobby Bourne; and, the year before he had drafted Bobby Nystrum. Then, Trottier was drafted the following year. Clark Guilles was drafted also. Then John Tunnelli was added. So Bill Torrey was doing a wonderful job of scouting, recruiting and drafting these wonderful, young kids and they would come to training camp and there would be another piece to the puzzle. And Al was unbelievable at putting, implementing systems, disciplines on how to for-check, back check, different systems on the power play, penalty killing, how to play in a tight game against an offensive minded team like the Montreal Canadiens of the 70′s, how to play against a rough and tumble hockey team like the Philadelphia Flyers and we repeated these systems at nauseas in practice. He would say, I want you to be able to do these things and recognize these things automatically on the ice without having to think. I want you to react instinctively and this is the way I want my teams to grow together. It was a combination of talented players that would be put together and coached extremely well by Al Arbor and every year from then on in we started to noticeably improve. In 1975, we made the players by beating the New York Rangers. Some of the Ranger players like Derik Sanderson said we would not win another game in the playoffs. It almost turned out to be true because we lost the next three playoff games against Pittsburgh. We were only the second team in the history of the NHL even to this day to come back from a three game deficit and beat Pittsburgh in seven. The seventh game we won one to nothing. Then we played the Flyers. We lost the first three games of that series and came back and won three. We lost the seventh game four to two. Every year after that if you look at our point in the standing we accumulated more points and then finally everything came together in 1979-1980 season. It didn’t start off like that. It didn’t look like that. In the middle part of the season my brother broke his thumb and he missed several months during that season. When he came back, I think it was sometime in March, he had not played since November, and at the trading deadline another fantastic trade occurred. We acquired Butch Goring.

And that was like the last piece of the puzzle. And with Dennis Goring and a healthy lineup, we hit our stride going into the playoffs. Al was great with preparing us and resting us, so we would enter the playoffs on a roll. A lot of teams crawled to the playoffs and make it, but they were not well prepared. They were tired. He was some kind of psychologist himself.

Schienberg: What was his personality like that gave him such a head for being a coach?

Potvin: Al was very unpredictable and that was the way he wanted it. Very simply put, I remember the first year Al Arbor came and I was playing regularly and then he started to take away some of my ice time. I went from playing twenty five minutes a game to dwindling from 15 to 10 and I was steaming. And Al would purposely not talk to me in practice and I would be dressing, I would play the power play and that was about it and I would be sitting on the bench and feeling really angry at him. And he wanted to see what I was made of – so instead of saying anything to me, he wanted to see what I would, how I would react. So, one day after practice, I said, “Al I want to talk with you.” He said, “Fine, when do you want to talk?” My reply was “Right after practice, today.” He said, “I can’t today, but I’ll do it after practice tomorrow.”

I did not know it but we had a video guy who taped all the games. It wasn’t like today. There was a guy in the press box who was taping all the games. Al had this video guy splice all the screw ups I made over the last seven, eight, nine games. The next day I go into his office after practice. All had a knack, you see he was a pretty big guy like 6 feet two inches. His chair was always a lot higher than the chair sitting across from him. So, you’d be sitting up looking up at him. He said, “What’s on your mind?” “Let’s cut to the chase here, I’m really upset. I’d like to know why my ice time has gone from 25 minutes to ten.” He said, “Why do you think that’s happening?” “I didn’t know. I think I’ve been playing pretty well, getting a few points here and there,” I noted emphatically. He said, “Why don’t we watch a couple of video highlights of you over the past several games?” The video shows me going into the corner of the ice with the opposing player and the opposing player has the puck and the opposing player beat me out of the corner and goes in front of net and scores or the goal tender has to make a big save. And he replies it two or three times and doesn’t say a word. Then he says, “Let’s go onto the next clip in the same game.” And he’s got all these clips one right after the other and it’s a piece where someone goes right around me at the blue line and heads towards the net alone and it’s my fault. So, he does this for three or four different instances. He says, “So you still think you’re playing pretty well?” He says, “Let me explain something to you and you might as well know it now. All I want, nothing more and nothing less, is one hundred percent. And if you think that is too difficult to give me I got a big problem with it. Let’s break it down. How many games a week do we play on average? Three four? Let’s say you are playing twenty minutes a game. That makes eighty minutes a week. If I can’t get 80 minutes of your best, whether you have the puck or don’t, you should be thinking, who’s my man, what position should I be in, where should I be if they have the puck, where should I be if we are on the offense. You have a job for twenty minutes a game. And if you can’t give me that, let me know and I’ll have you on the first bus out of town. Do we understand each other?” I said, “Yeah, I got it. Thanks Al.” On the way home I said to myself I can’t argue with the guy. He’s 100% right. It was part of growing up so to speak. He did it not just with me with me. He did it with my brother and many other players. He would pick his spots and all of sudden we were on the same page. We all at one point or another got the same speech. And he did it individually – not with everyone in the room where you are not paying attention.

Schienberg: Was he glad that you came to him finally?

Potvin: Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. He gave me a tap during practice. I was playing better. I was getting my ice time back. He said, “Potzy”. I’m very proud of you. I’m glad you came to me because I would have allowed you to sit there. I wanted to see what you were made of. If would have sat there and accepted that would have told me volumes about you and your heart and your gut. The fact that it upset you makes me happy. And that’s the way I want you to be because you are hungry – stay hungry. Al was a master of getting the best out of his players. And he would do it in different ways with different players.

Schienberg: Do you think he knew he had to provoke you?

Potvin: Every now and then he knew I had to be kicked in the ass. He use to really upset my brother.

Schienberg: How did he do it to Dennis?

Potvin: Well, Dennis was the real cornerstone of our team. He was the defenseman, quarterback, the captain. And Al would pick on him. Let’s say, after the first period, if we were not playing well, Al would come in the room right before the buzzer would come on signaling we had to go on the ice in two or three minutes. He’d say, “Listen, I’m not going to name any names here, but this has got to stop. I don’t care how well they’re playing. If we were playing our best hockey this would not be happening.” His voice would go up and down. He was a very intimidating person – not physically. He then say, “I’m not going to mention any names.” He would then talk about what we did wrong and then he’d turn to my brother and he’d say, “You, you’re the captain, I didn’t see you, where were you the whole period?” Denny wouldn’t say anything. But, Denny would play with an edge and play great hockey. Denny would be so upset with Al. But Al didn’t care because he knew he had pushed the right button. After I retired, I asked Al why he didn’t treat Trottier or Bossy the same as Denny. Al indicated that he knew if he could get Denny playing, the others would follow suit. And Denny to this day does not totally believe that Al was doing it for Denny’s good. He was very angry at Al for many years. Denny said that if Al had walked in front of his car after practice, he would have run him over. There was no love lost between the two of them. Denny has a bigger ego than I do. And they would butt heads. That’s why Al wanted me around. Denny and I would go out after a game and hang out together. Denny would vent his anger at Al and Bill with me. I’d say calm down. “You played like a hall of famer the last two periods. In the first period, I didn’t know if you’d have enough strength to finish it. Al may have pissed him off, but look at the results.”

Schienberg: Did that get through to him?

Potvin: It still would piss him off. Why doesn’t he pick on the others. I’m getting tired of being the whipping horse. So, Al was a master. He didn’t give a crap if we were angry at him. But, Al would go to bat for us with the press or with Bill Torry. Bill was unbelievable also.

Schienberg: In what way?

Potvin: Bill was always around, but he’d let Al run the locker room. Sometimes Al would turn to Bill and say I’m out of words. So, Bill would come into the locker room dressed in his bow tie after practice and we would be sitting there and he’d start “Trainers get out of the room. Al get out of the room.” When Bill spoke we were going to get creamed. He’d slam the door and lock the door and pace the locker room back and forth for ten minutes. “You can continue to play like that but it won’t be here.” He once said to me, “If your father ever saw you play, he be kicking your ass all over this room. Do you think your father would be proud if he saw what you were doing out there on the ice?” Our father was a very good hockey player and he’d played against Montreal in jury hockey and then went to the Detroit training camp and broke his back and his career ended. He was a little tiger. He was not a good loser no matter what he was doing. He didn’t know what less than 100% meant. Before Bill would draft a player, obviously talent is very important, Bill told me in the top three rounds you never know who you are going to draft. He said, “I never drafted any player that I didn’t meet the parents. I wanted to know what his parents were like. Where the kid came from was important. What was the mother like? What was the father like? What did he do for a living? Was he a sincere man? Did he look at me in the eyes? That would tell me a lot about the kind of kid I was going to get.” Then he called the midget or bandom hockey. He would get a full picture of what the kid was like.

My father was a great player. There are the right genes. We had a TV. It had three channels. The only time the TV would go on was to watch hockey. My father made a hockey rink in the back yard. Whenever we had a chance we would on the rink

Schienberg: Clark Gilles was the captain before your brother? Right?

Potvin: Correct.

Schienberg: Does the captain make a difference?

Potvin: Clark> was voted in as the captain. But, he gave it up. He wore the C for one year and didn’t have a very good year. Some people put to much pressure on themselves. So, the next year, he gave it up. He said he wanted to concentrate on the team and my game. The C is giving me too much pressure. Bill and Al decided that Dennis would be the captain and that was the first year we won the StanleyCup. Dennis was no a rah rah kind of guy. He was much more by example.

Schienberg: So, what responsibility did the captain have over a regular player on the team?

Potvin: Be able to talk with your teammates about anything. Like a coach. You become very close knit – even more than the coach – certainly different. Must care about teammates. If we were disenchanted with Al, the captain would be the spokesperson. Al would sometimes ask Denny to call and team meeting and find out what’s going on here. Sometimes Al was intimidating and people would not speak up. But, in private, you’d get more openness.

Schienberg: When Dennis would go to Al after a meeting, what would he say?

Potvin: He say, Al I think we had a great meeting and we accomplished a lot. Everything is better. Al would ask if he should get involved? Dennis would say no.

Schienberg: When you left the Islanders, was it because you were done?

Potvin: I was traded to the Cleveland. Al cried. They felt they needed me for Wayne Merrick.

“How’d you like to come to the Islanders, Al asked a year later. I miss your effect in the locker room.” This is 1979. You might get a lot of ice time. I want you in the locker room. Get them mentally ready. I was 32 years old. He asked me to the voice of the Islanders. I said yes. So, I was on the radio for the next seven years. He works on the institutional side of Wall Street today.

Schienberg: What do you think of the new rules?

Potvin: I like most. Two, I don’t like. You can stand in front of the ice without being hit and I don’t like getting one point if you lose by way of a shoot out.

Thousands of middle school football games get played across the country every weekend. Coaches and players spend hours trying to figure out ways to beat their opponents. Teams sometimes run up winning scores so that contracts are renewed, scholarships are offered, and players will be rewarded with gifts of all kinds.

Something happened in a football game a couple of weeks ago that reminds us of more important life-gains to be acquired by participating in sports. One such incident occurred in a small town outside of New York City. Somers Middle School was playing John Jay Middle School.

The Somers coach, Bud Von Heyn, asked Jeff Tepper, the coach of John Jay for a favor. After Jeff agreed, Bud gathered his players and told them to run the E.J. Shuffle play. Jeff passed the instructions onto his team.

The E.J. Shuffle would begin on the John Jay 35- yard line. E.J. Greczylo, a 15 year-old eighth grader, would be part of this one play and no other – no other for his entire football career. He was instructed by Coach Bud where to position himself in the backfield and to follow the fullback where ever he goes.

The players on both sides of the line of scrimmage took their positions; the ball was snapped to the quarterback, who then gave it to E.J. – a strong looking young boy with an awkward style of running. He held the ball beside his stomach, ran toward the sideline and then toward the goal line.

Everyone in the crowd, and players from both the John Jay and Somers bench cheered for E.J. The opposition players made like they were trying to tackle him, but either tripped or lunged ineffectively. Everyone was into the act. The attempt was to make one kid feel good – E.J. who suffered from Down syndrome. You see football was E.J.’s dream and he was taught by his parents to follow his dreams. At Somers, children who are disadvantaged are treated like the other children. So, when E.J.’s teacher let the coach know of his dream – to play football, started to practice with the team.

Obviously, there are some ethical questions raised. One is that E.J. wasn’t really treated like the other players on the team. Ok, that one is obvious. Sometimes we are faced with two ethical dilemmas simultaneously. I believe they made the right choice. E.J. was not deluded about his abilities. He didn’t expect a football scholarship to arrive from the University of Miami. He got what was going on. But, it was a thrill non-the-less. Everyone got taught a great lesson and did something that will make them feel like winners the rest of their lives. There was never a better touchdown scored. It was the first time in football history that both teams won.

I. THE NATURE OF GROUPS

A. Definition of a Group

1.The common fate of members serves to highlight the nature of a group.
2.Groups are a source of strength.
3.Groups are characterized by a social structure (roles, norms, status differences and positional differences).
4.Groups are characterized by a variety of group processes such as communication, cooperation, task and social interactions, etc.
5.Members of a group engage in a way that they consider themselves to be part of a “we” that differentiates them from “they”.

B. Definition of a Sports Team
1. Collection of two or more athletes who possess a common identity.
2. They have common goals and objectives.
3. Share a common fate.
4. Exhibit structured patterns of interactions and modes of communication
5.Hold common perceptions about group structure
6.Personally and instrumentally interdependent
7.Consider themselves to be a group.

II. Population of a Sports Team
A. Basketball team
1.A basketball team has a collective identity in that individual players, teammates and non-team members all view the group as distinguishable from other units (Los Angeles Lakers).
2.The team has short-term objectives (practicing blocking out for rebounds) and long-term goals (winning the championship).
3. Usually each team has a unique playbook that new players must learn before they can play. Each play might have a name and signal that only the team’s players know.
4. A specific amount of players are allowed on the court. Interaction with the competition must follow certain accepted rules. If any one player brakes the norms or standards of conduct, the team will suffer.
5. The pursuit of goals over the course of a season causes the collection of athletes to think of themselves as a group.

B. Group Versus Collection of Individuals. People in groups
1. Talk freely
2. Interested in welfare of the collective as a whole
3. To assist teammates.
4. Refer to teammates as “we” and other players as “they”.
5. Feel their teammates are helpful.
6. Reliably participate in group activities.
7. Not primarily interested in individual accomplishments
8. Are concerned about the activity of other teammates.
9. Do not see teammates as rivals.
II. GROUP COHESION
A.Definition
1. Groups are dynamic, not static. They exhibit life and vitality, interaction, and activity. This vitality is sometimes negatively and positively expressed. Group members may be in harmony and at other times, they may be in conflict. Communications vary as well from openness to non-existent. Commitment to the group’s goals and purposes can vary also.
2. Cohesion is a dynamic process which is reflected in the tendency for a group to stick together and remain united in the pursuit of its instrumental objectives and /or for the satisfaction of member affective needs.
a. Cohesion is multi-dimensional.
b. Cohesion is not as transitory as a state or as stable as a trait.
c. All groups have a purpose.
d. Cohesion has an affective dimension regardless of its instrumental nature.
e. The goals and objectives of all groups are complex and varied.
3. Cohesion within Sports Group has four facets.
a. Individual attraction to the group – task
b. Individual attraction to the group – social
c. Group Integration – task.
d. Group Integration – social.
III. Developing a Team Concept: Correlates of Cohesion

A. Situational Factors
1. Individuals in close have a greater tendency to bond together. (Golf team). Examples include a team locker room, residence or training table. Interaction becomes inevitable.
2. As a team becomes more separate – more distinctive – from other groups – feelings of oneness and unity increase. Examples include uniforms, mottos, special initiation rites, special privileges, or demanding special sacrifices.Year long training and reduced time for social activities or part-time employment increase cohesiveness. Emphasize sense of history and tradition of the organization.
3. Team size is also associated with cohesiveness. Moderate sized groups showed greatest cohesiveness. Larger and smaller size groups showed the least cohesiveness. Task cohesiveness decreased as size increased.
B. Personal Factors
1. Similarity in attitudes, aspirations, commitments and ability were correlated with cohesiveness.
2. Differences in personality, ethnicity, racial background, economic status, and other factors are inevitable.
3. The most important factor in the development of task and social cohesiveness is individual satisfaction.
a. Individual satisfaction is influenced by quality of competition.
b. Opportunity for social interaction is also important.
c. Athletes need to feel that they are improving their skill levels.
d. Recognition from others (parents, coaches, teammates, and public).
e. A personal factor associated with cohesiveness is commitment to the team.
C. Leadership Factors
1. In a mutiny cohesion is high, the leader-subordinate relationship is poor (the leader is excluded from the group) and performance is poor.
2. In a study of golf coaches and team members, golf coaches were not crucial to the development of team cohesion.
3. The perception that a group has about itself becomes more distorted the more cohesive it is. The group tends to be very favorable in its perception of its own members and to overvalue its own contributions, importance and performance. On the other side of the same coin, the team undervalues the contributions, importance, and performance of other groups or non group members. This turning inward can lead to some difficulties for a new, formally appointed leader such as a coach. This is especially true when a successful and popular coach has been replaced.
4. Decision making style is important. Team members engage in behaviors more persistently, with greater intensity and for a longer duration when they have an opportunity to participate in decision making.
5. The compatibility between coaches and athletes is related to team cohesiveness.

D. Team Factors
1. Group positions: refers to the fact that when collections of individuals meet regularly people tend to consistently occupy a specific geographic space. This contributes to a sense of continuity and unity and development of perceptions of “we” versus “they.”
2. A role is a set of behaviors that are expected from the occupants of specific positions within the group.
a. Formal Roles are explicitly set out by the group’s organization. Coach, team captain, and manager, forward, guard and center in basketball are explicit formal roles. Individuals are trained or recruited to carry out each of these roles.
b. Informal roles evolve as a result of the interactions that take place among group members. Some examples are leader, enforcer, police officer, social director and team clown.
c. When individual group members understand their roles and attempt to carry out their roles to the best of their ability (role performance) the group’s effectiveness is improved.
d. The behavior requirements of each role should be made as explicit as possible.
e. Role acceptance is enhanced when the coach minimizes the status differences between roles.
f. Role clarity and role acceptance can be improved through an effective goal-setting program. Goal-setting serves four important functions: it directs the individual’s attention and actions toward appropriate behavior, it motivates the individual to develop strategies to achieve the goal, it contributes to increased interest in the activity and it leads to prolonged .
3. The presence of norms is also associated with increased cohesiveness. A norm can be task irrelevant or task relevant. A norm reflects the group’s consensus about behaviors that are considered acceptable.
a. New team members quickly become aware of the standard of behaviors that are considered acceptable in their interactions with the manager and begin to act accordingly.
b. With increased cohesiveness there is greater conformity to group standards for behavior and performance.
c. New groups have minimal influence over its members.
d. As cohesion increases, adherence to norms and behavior increases. Failure to conform can lead to sanctions.
e. Norm for productivity: Productivity above or below the standard is not tolerated by the group.
4.The key factor that influences the relationship between cohesion and productivity is the group’s norm for productivity.
a. If group cohesion is high and the norm for productivity is high, performance will be positively affected.
b. If group cohesion is high and norm for productivity is low, performance will be low or negative.
c. When cohesion is low and groups with a high norm will outperform groups with a low norm.
5. Another important aspect of group norm is stability.
a. It has been shown that a norm established on a team will persist for four or five generations after the original members have left.
b. If a negative norm, such as abusive behavior toward officials, or other team members, a laissez-faire attitude toward training, a reliance on individual versus team goals, those goals could persist over a number of seasons unless steps are taken. To change the norm it is important to enlist both formal and informal leaders. If these leaders are not cooperative to the change, personnel shifts might need to be considered.
6. Group Goals and Rewards
a. In this day and age individual players get many individual recognition and rewards.
b. Therefore it is important that the coach ensure the concept of unity is reinforced.
c. The coach must emphasize the group’s goal and objectives and rewards that will accrue to the group if these are achieved. Individual goals and rewards should be downplayed.
7. Communication
a. As the level of communication relating to task and social issues increases, cohesion is enhanced.
b. As the group becomes more cohesion, there is also increased communication.
c. The exchange of task information and social pleasantries increases with cohesiveness.
8. Ways to Improve Coach-Athlete Communication and Team Harmony
a. Open communication channels by providing opportunities for athletic input. There must be mutual respect and essential in order to keep the channels open.
b. Develop pride and a sense of collective identity within the group by setting out realistic team, individual, and subunit goals.
c. Strive for common expectations on what type of behavior are appropriate. The coach should specify objectives, strategy, operating procedure, or means to reach the goals.
d. The coach could value unique personal contributions by emphasizing the importance of each role that are necessary for group performance.
e. The outstanding execution of a role should be recognized to enhance the pride and commitment in the group by its members.
f. Strive for consensus and commitment in goal-setting activities.
g. Use periodic team meetings to resolve conflict.
h. Stay in touch with formal and informal leaders in the team.
i. Focus on success before discussing any failures.
j. Success contributes to cohesiveness. So, it is good for the coach to have an easier schedule at the beginning of the season.
k. Group cohesion is influenced by team stability. When groups are together for a long time, their sense of cohesiveness increases. Members do not voluntarily leave the team, are more punctual at practices, are absent less often and leave practice before it’s over less frequently. A coach should try to avoid excessive personnel turnover.

IV. TEAM BUILDLING
A. The intention of team building is to promote an increased sense of unity and cohesiveness and enable the team to function more smoothly and effectively.
B. One approach to team building interventions is as follows:
1. Introductory Stage: The relationship between perception of cohesiveness and enhanced team dynamics are discussed.
2. Conceptual Stage: There are three purposes behind this stage.
a. to facilitate communication with coaches/leaders about complex concepts like groups, cohesiveness, etc.
b. to highlight the interrelatedness of various components of the team-building protocol
c. to identify the focus for possible interventions.
3. Practical Stage: The purpose was to have coaches/leaders, in an interactive brainstorming session, attempt to generate as many specific strategies as possible to use for team building in their group. Specific intervention strategies are important for three reasons:
a. Coaches/leaders differ in personality and preferences – a strategy that might work for one coach might not work for another.
b. Groups differ as well. So, a strategy that might work for one group might not work for another.
c. Motivation is enhanced when individuals are given greater control over personal behavior.
4. Intervention Stage
a. The team-building protocols were introduced and maintained by leaders.
b. Selected high status members of the team should be included as part of the intervention stage. They can be very effective in giving effective feedback.

Part I: Siblings and Athletics

Schienberg: I read over material regarding your sports career. I’ve seen you play hockey. I identified four areas that I’d like to talk with you about. One is the playing of sports with a sibling – namely your younger brother, Dennis.

Potvin: We’ve always played together. Dennis and I played three years together in junior hockey. I’m four and a half years older than he is and then I went on to turn professional. And I played four years as a pro and, as luck would have it, I ended up with the New York Islanders. I asked for a trade from

Philadelphia to the Islanders. And my wish came true because I knew that my brother was going to be drafted number one by the Islanders. From there on in we played approximately seven years together and shared some great times.Schienberg: He became a major figure.Potvin: Yeah, Dennis is a hall of fame player. Many people think of him as one of the top five defensemen. I was not in that class. I was a better than average player, but lucky enough to play with some great teams with the Islanders.Schienberg: Now, I know my brother and I…we loved each other but we also had our moments of difficulty.Potvin: I have to tell you that the time we fought the most was when we were little kids. Once we started to play hockey together, it was a totally different thing. I had a big brother type of attitude towards my younger brother. At thirteen or fourteen, it was obvious to me and everyone else that if he stayed healthy and focused, he was going to become a star – even at that young an age – and it was interesting – my father pulled me aside when I was eighteen and Dennis was fourteen – my father said to me you are going to look after your brother. And he said, what I mean by is that other players are not going to like a thirteen year old showing them up. Some of them are going to go after him and try to hurt him. And he said if someone hits your brother I want you to get in between Dennis and the guy and beat the crap out of them. And I did it and I gladly did it. I became very protective and wanted Dennis to be able to play his game. Dennis was a big kid for thirteen, but we were playing against twenty and twenty one year olds.Schienberg: So that is pretty young for someone to be put in the role of being a star. You’re going to be the protector and he’s going to be the star.

Potvin: I wasn’t looking at it so much as he’s going to be the star as I was going to protect my brother and on one is going to screw with him.

Schienberg: Your father told you that. He said in no uncertain terms you go out there and protect him.

Potvin: But, that’s a role I had no problems with from the first game we played together. And the rules that my father gave to the coach, general manager and owner of the Ottawa 67′s was that Dennis is to never be on the ice unless he is with Jean. I played right defense and he played left defense. So, the two of us must be on the ice together. If Jean gets a penalty, Dennis does not go on the ice to kill the penalty. If Jean is injured, Dennis doesn’t play either. I want Dennis and Jean to be on the ice at the same time. So we were and luckily I didn’t get injured. Again, I could see that the kid was becoming better with every game. I never had an ounce of jealousy. I just wanted him to be as good as he could be. From that time on, we spent a lot of time together on the buses. I would give him a couple of tips on what he had not done well or how he could do better, mistakes he made so he didn’t repeat them. This carried on once I had four years of experience in the National Hockey League, when he became a rookie in the NHL and the process just continued from then on. And my brother and I never had any differences when we played together. But still Dennis is my best friend to this day.

Schienberg: Were you and Dennis ever separated from each other as hockey players?

Potvin: Dennis continued to play junior hockey when I went to the NHL. By then he was a big enough kid to take care of himself. At sixteen years old he was 5 feet 11 inches and 165 pounds. So, he could take care of himself. By the time Dennis got to the NHL he weighed two hundred ten pounds of solid rock. I said to him, “Remember all those years I took care of you, now it is your turn to take care of me.” He’s built like me but a little bit bigger. I played at 195 pounds and he played at 210-212 pounds.

Schienberg: What does Dennis do now?

Potvin: He does the color commentating for the Florida Panthers. So, he works during the hockey season and in the off season he has a place around Montreal and that’s where he stays in the summers.

Further exploring specific problems and resolutions designed to get athletes and coaches on the same frequency.

This article will address more communication blocks that can interfere with inner personal blocks (player in player and coach in coach) and interpersonal blocks (player to coach, player to player and coach to player) understandings and athletic performance. Please re-read The Basics in “Communication Blocks: I & II”, volume 3, Issue 7 and volume 4, Issue 1 before reading the list in this article (www.psychedonline.org/Article/Vol4Issue2/CommunicationBlocks.htm).

15. A coach/player can send a “Be spontaneous!” paradox. This occurs when one person requests or demands something from another person that can only be given spontaneously – like trust, interest, acceptance, appreciation, desire, and respect. Should the second person try to comply, the first person may then say – “You’re just doing that because I asked you to, not because you really mean it.”
    The solution to this block is mutual knowledge of this concept, mutual communication awareness and the second person asserting something like “You’re asking me to give you something that has to be spontaneous” and both people digging down to illuminate the underlying relationship needs that are causing this situation.
16. Generalizing can muffle or distort the current message and prevent effective problem solving. “You’re always insensitive and inconsiderate!” will probably be received differently than “I’m mad and frustrated because you’re 40 minutes late and I missed my team bus!” You always…”or “You never…” are deadly because they imply the receiver is 1 – down (disrespected) and invite him or her to feel guilty and defensive about many past events as well as the present one. Normal responses to this block are to flee, tune out, and/or counterattack (vs. listen empathetically and problem-solve).
17. Preaching, moralizing, or advising someone with a problem (I’m just trying to help!”) can erode relationships if the “struggler” just needs to vent (be respectfully heard and accepted). These reactions in the receiver promote dependency, helplessness, and imply” I’m 1-up – I know how to fix your problem and, you don’t.” Sometimes this is true!Me/You
18. Players and coaches not knowing the difference between win-win problem-solving and common (ineffective) alternatives like fighting, arguing, threatening, avoiding, blaming, explaining, preaching, moralizing, monologing, hinting, whining, numbing out, defocusing, enduring, imposing, submitting, pretending and assuming. When any of these occur try asking “Are we problem -solving now, or something else?
19. Sarcastic, critical (vs. affectionate) name-calling erodes the receiver’s self-esteem and the odds for cooperative problem solving. “You’re stupid, lazy, spacey, nuts, weird, hopeless, a jerk ……..”etc. hurts! The non verbal version of this block is a player’s/coach’s look that conveys massive disapproval. Whose needs get met?
20. Physical or emotional withdrawal is a powerful communication that may imply “You scare or overwhelm me”. In resolving this communication block, respectfully explore if the sender is unconsciously doing something that triggers withdrawal.
21. Threats or demands suggest “My current needs are more important than yours!” They provoke hurt resentment, defiance, and everyone feeling badly about themselves and/or the exchange. The receiver has to use assertive metatalk when this happens – “I feel you’re making a demand (or a threat) now. When you do that, I feel resentful, anxious, and combative. I need you to make your point another way.”

A “shrink” can expand your athletic performance.

By Paul Schienberg, PhD

Look what you’ve done, Yankee fans.

According to a report in the New York Daily News, New York Yankee third baseman Alex Rodriquez said he was undergoing therapy with multiple therapists to deal with his personal demons.

Rodriquez made the admission after he and his wife, Cynthia, donated $200,000 to a mental health program at the Children’s Aid Society in Washington Heights.

“I don’t know where I’d be (without therapy),” Rodriguez told the television show “Extra” in a segment to air Wednesday night at 7 E.T.

“I think it’s a different life that I’ve discovered and I thank Cynthia for that because therapy is an incredible thing and you might get to know someone you didn’t even know was in there.

“Why let the train wreck come before you fix it?”

Rodriguez did not specify the reasons for his ongoing therapy, but characterized his sessions as a “maintenance thing.”

The admission is a rarity in the world of professional sports.

After struggling during his first season in New York, Rodriguez has rebounded in his second go-around. His two homers during the Yankees’ 12-3 win over the Tigers Tuesday gave him a major league best 16 home runs and 46 RBI’s.

“It’s helped in baseball, for one, in terms of my approach to everything,” Rodriguez told the Daily News. “I think it would be great if kids out there realize that it can be a great benefit.”

Rodriquez has previously admitted to a rocky relationship with his father, Victor, who abandoned him when he was just nine years old. Victor resurfaced when the younger Rodriguez reached the major leagues, but the two remain estranged.

“I know where he came from and I know where he came from and I know his background and seeing how successful he is as a man, as a husband, as a friend, it really hits home with me,” Rodriguez’s wife Cynthia told the show. “It’s because of therapeutic intervention that he’s been able to discover and flourish as a person.”