I’ll
call him Ben. He was a wizened old auto mechanic
by trade, philosopher by practice. He
and I were leaning on the fence watching the high school football game (at the
time I was the principal of that high school).
Ben
and I were comparing notes on game strategy, player proficiency, the weather,
life, and coaches. On the latter of
those topics Ben commented that “the one you ain’t got always looks better than
the one you got.”
I
had seen coaches come and go, seen them win and lose, seen them castigated and
memorialized. But, Ben had made an
astute observation – every coach I’d
ever known had been subjected to critique (often severe) by virtually everyone
who had an interest in the team. More
often than not, the critics had never tried coaching, had never attempted to
lead a group of 12-18 year olds, had never been charged with organizing
anything more complex than the weekly schedule of their own family. Why in the world would/do coaches repeatedly
submit themselves to such relentless (and often unfair) scrutiny?
Coaches
risk being criticized every time they put their “product” on the field or the
court. It comes with the territory. Most do it, however, with a clear eye on the
future – the future of the young men and women they’re attempting to
discipline, mold, refine, and shape.
They are very aware that the real
contest is not today’s game, but rather, the long game.
Now
having the benefit of 40 years of retrospect, the one you ain’t got might look
better than the one you got. But
virtually all who don the title “coach” are worthy of our appreciation.
While
I’m at it, “Thanks, Coach.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.