John McMahon: Two coaches, no ego, one performance goal

I have been involved in GAA teams’ preparation for over 20 years. Over this time, I have had the opportunity to work with some amazing field coaches. Also during this time I have worked with many poor field coaches.

Unfortunately, ego and arrogance are crippling facades for both S&C and field coaches. Instead of communicating honestly, I have observed these coaches trundle on with their own insecurities and fear of admitting – I just don’t know…. I got that wrong.

Below is some guidance and advice I have accumulated over the years.

In modern GAA, the physical demands placed on players continue to increase. Speed, strength, power, repeat-effort ability and physical robustness are now fundamental components of performance.

Yet the effectiveness of these qualities depends on more than the quality of the gym programme or the design of a field session. It depends on the relationship between the S and C coach and the field coach.

Both have a significant role to play, but neither operates in isolation.

The S and C coach is responsible for developing the physical qualities that allow players to perform the demands of the game.

The field coach must prepare players to execute the technical and tactical requirements of competition. While their areas of expertise differ, their objectives should be aligned.

The problem arises when these two areas operate independently rather than collaboratively.

A well-designed strength programme can be undermined by poorly managed field loads.

Equally, a demanding field programme can compromise the quality of physical development if gym work, recovery and total training load are not considered. Players ultimately absorb the consequences when planning and communication are disconnected.

This is why communication must extend beyond sharing a weekly schedule. It requires honest conversations about player readiness, training loads, individual needs, recovery and the demands of the upcoming competition. It requires both coaches to understand what the other is trying to achieve and why.

Differences of opinion

There will inevitably be differences of opinion. That is not a weakness. Constructive challenge, supported by evidence and professional experience, should strengthen decision-making.

Hiding away in a silo and not communicating is really poor. The key is mutual respect, clarity of roles and a willingness to put personal preferences aside when they conflict with the needs of the team.

Neither coach needs to control every aspect of preparation. Both need to understand how their decisions influence the bigger picture.

Ultimately, the player should never become the communication link between two coaches. Nor should players receive conflicting messages about standards, expectations or priorities.

Alignment among the coaching staff creates clarity for players and gives them the best opportunity to develop.

The strongest performance environments are not necessarily those with the most sophisticated programmes or the most experienced individuals. They are those where expertise is shared, communication is consistent & honest & everyone understands the common objective.

Two coaches. Different expertise. One team.