Coaching Through Change: A Season of Growth & Learning

This past season tested everything—our approach, adaptability, and ability to develop players in real time.

We finished 13-11 with a mixed roster of experience and inexperience, youth and veterans. Early on, we were learning how to play within a conceptual offensive and defensive framework built on reads, principles, and decision-making instead of static plays and rigid systems.

The process wasn’t easy. We lost an assistant coach on Day 2 of practice, which meant one less voice for the players and one less set of eyes to help process what we were seeing. Eight games in, our starting center—our best rebounder and playmaker—went down for the season. We won the first game without him, then lost five straight while trying to figure out our identity.

Some nights, it clicked. We moved the ball, played within our principles, and created high-quality shots. One game, we went 15-for-40 from three, not because we ran a perfect offense, but because we generated the right looks through decision-making and movement.

Other nights, players reverted back to old habits—defaulting to what was comfortable rather than what we had been working toward. That’s the challenge when you’re not just teaching new skills, but undoing years of traditional coaching.

And I understand that, because I was once the same way.

From Traditional to Modern Coaching

Like most coaches, I taught the way I was coached. We repeat what we know. But at a certain point, I started asking myself, is there a better way?

That question led me to the Constraints-Led Approach (CLA) and ecological dynamics, frameworks that challenge the idea of breaking the game into isolated drills and memorized plays. Instead of focusing on pre-planned movements, CLA emphasizes creating environments where players develop decision-making skills, adaptability, and problem-solving abilities in real time—just like in an actual game.

This season, that philosophy was tested.

We had a side pick-and-roll action called Side, but it wasn’t a scripted play. There was no set outcome—just a structure that required players to read the defense and make the right decision based on spacing and personnel. It gave them guidelines, not scripts.

That doesn’t mean they didn’t need guidance. With a young team, we had to meet them where they were.

One player asked me, “Coach, when are we going to put plays in?”

So, we “put in plays”—except they weren’t really plays at all. They were structured actions designed to fit our team’s strengths and reinforce our principles. But for the players, calling them “plays” provided a level of familiarity and comfort. Sometimes, language matters as much as philosophy.

We didn’t abandon structure—we still had plays. But they weren’t predetermined sequences. They were dynamic actions, shaped by context. Instead of just memorizing movements, players were learning how to solve problems in real time.

That’s the shift. Instead of teaching them what to do, we were teaching them how to think.

What Mattered Most This Season

A few things stood out this year:

• Small-sided games drove real development. Every day, we built constraint-driven environments that forced players to make decisions under realistic conditions. They weren’t just repping skills—they were applying them in context.

• Film changed everything. We recorded every practice and game, which allowed us to see patterns, track progress, and make precise adjustments.

• Some players resisted the approach. They had been conditioned to expect drills, static plays, and clear-cut “right” answers. Adapting to a more dynamic system wasn’t always comfortable.

• Joy, humility, and resilience were non-negotiable. We played with joy, stayed humble in wins and losses, and learned to navigate adversity without losing our identity.

• Coaching this way forces you to improve. By the end of the season, I was adjusting constraints in real time, recognizing when a player’s decision-making was disrupting flow, and making live corrections based on what we saw on film.

For Coaches Who Want More

If we want better players, we need to be better coaches.

That starts with asking: Is there a better way?

If the answer is yes, we owe it to our players to find it, learn it, and apply it. This season wasn’t just about developing players—it was about evolving as a coach.

For those out there challenging traditional methods, questioning old habits, and looking for ways to build smarter, more adaptable players—keep going.

The game is changing. Coaching should too.