This blog post, the third in my series entitle Checking for Understanding seeks to answer one of favorite questions: "Why are the greats great?" I'm not so interested in what makes the great ones tick, but I do want to know: What do they do? How do they think? and What habits do they hold that make the difference? As a sports fan, there is no shortage of articles/polls/blogs/lists that seek to identify the G.O.A.T., the Mount Rushmore, your All-Star team. Who you deem worthy of that title or position is up to you. I've got ideas too. But my question remains: Why is "X" great?
I have found that when I really and truly want to know something, the answer often finds me. Yes, we can research our topic, we can around and inquire from others, but I almost enjoy it more when I do and don't make that happen. And, questions, like the one I am asking make for good conversation. It's fun to see how people respond. So before I share an answer, Check for understanding on 1) the idea of letting answers find you and 2) what makes the greats, great. Ready? This is what I have found....
If you play with him, you're looking every day at living proof of why the greats are the greats. It's not by accident. It's an obsession to reach that level and remain at that level. The dedication, the commitment, is such a unique thing. You don't find it. He inspired me to be better, to see the game in a more detailed way.
Reading the latter part of Gasol's description stayed with me. I heard the same words—seeing "the game in a more detailed way"—when former Patriot's tight end Aaron Hernandez described his coach, Bill Belichick.
Although the Netflix documentary Killer Inside: The Mind of Aaron Hernandez is a tragic tale, it doesn't negate the fact that Belichick was regarded by Hernandez, Gronkowski, Brady and countless others are aware they play for one of the greatest coaches of all time. The documentary states why: Belichick pays incredible attention to detail. I took note of the commonality in the answers that found me. I started to wonder, do all greats incredible attention to detail. And, if so, what does THAT mean. Why is it important? With those questions in mind, another answer found me as I was listening to the podcast Fresh Air: Winston Churchill and Fearless Leadership. There is no transcript for this show so I have summarized what I learned here. But check it out and give it a listen for yourself.
Erik Larson, the author of The Splendid And The Vile said, in commenting on Churchill's outstanding leadership during crisis—World War II—that the man loved to work. He said,
His work ethic was outstanding, but not just because he worked incredibly long hours. but because he wasn't afraid to dive into the weeds and explore even the most detailed elements of government or what was going on at that time. And so, he would send off these memoranda or minutes to his ministers directly and would explore these minute points. This had the very interesting affect of putting these ministers on guard because suddenly the bureaucratic piece of their ministries was being completely uended by this man who really had an interest in everything they were doing, down to the nuts and bolts of their operation. This made people stand up and pay attention to what they were doing themselves and put them on the mark.
In Larson' description of Churchill, I gained a sense of what it means to pay attention to detail and why that is important. I love the expression of "diving into the weeds." When you are passionate about a subject, the weeds might actually be a flower! I also know how much better I perform when I am being held accountable, advised and directed by a superior. When this leader is inspiring, that attribute makes me want to do even better. When that leader is a micromanager and discouraging close attention to the details can be tedious and laborious. We all do what we have to do, but if we share a common goal and want to win, this might be the necessary path. Checking for understanding around the question: What makes the greats great—and one answer: paying attention to detail should prompt you to ask yourself. Where are you willing to dive into the weeds? What do you take notice of and pay close attention to? How might people know this? And if you can't answer this question just yet, maybe an answer will find you.... Let me know!
Teaching might be my day job, but that doesn't mean a good piece of pedagogy ought to go to waste! In my last post, I offered a tip for parents as educators: Checking for Understanding. In today's topic, I'm going to run a theory by you. Test it out and have fun with it. The goal is two-fold. One: check for understanding the argument that I am going to make and two: discuss. Do you agree? Why or why not?
That's right: What we are checking for understanding is a theory—a personal belief, a truth that I have found in reading and writing about professional athletes. I think this is especially true among female basketball players. You might think that is a very specific group, but for the point of your discussion, I encourage you to test it out on other sports/among all athletes. The April 2016 issue of High School Today, the magazine of NFHS: National Federation of State High School Associations (for Athletics) ran a profile of University of Virginia's women's basketball coach, Tina Thompson. The article "It all started here" reports
Before she became the WNBA all-time leading scorer, and before she was the first draft pick in the history of the WNBA, and even before she starred at Inglewood (California) Morningside High School, Tina Thompson got her start in basketball on the playground of West Los Angeles.
Thompson would join her brother, TJ, and his friends at Robertson Park for pick up games. At Morningside, Thompson played basketball alongside fellow WNBA star Lisa Leslie, and also played volleyball. During her high school career, she scored more than 1500 points and collected more than 1000 rebounds.
Thompson and Lesley teamed up again at Southern California, where they lead the Trojans to three NCAA tournament appearances. Thompson graduated in 1997 with a degree in sociology and a minor in psychology.
In the initial WNBA draft, Thompson was drafted first by the Houston Comets. In Houston, Thompson led the Comets to four consecutive WNBA championships from 1997 to 2000. When she retired in 2013, Thompson was the WNBA's all-time leading scorer was 7488 points. Thompson was also a member of the 2004 and 2008 gold-medal-winning US Olympic teams.
In 2015 Thompson was hired as an assistant coach at the University of Texas.
A few important post-scripts include: In 2018, she was named head coach of the University of Virginia Cavaliers women's basketball team. She has been surpassed by Diana Taurasi as the all-time scoring leader, ranking an impressive number two and it should be noted she adds another chapter to the heroics of The Women of Troy!
Reading Thompson's brief profile was both inspiring and nearly formulaic. Seems to me that great athletes, those men and women who play in college and professionally more often than not share three things in common. 1. They grow up playing sports in an unstructured environment. The importance of free play is not to be underestimated. When kids play with other kids, in public places or on their own, over time they develop not only the skills that are necessary to succeed, but they find their own—those that are you unique to them.
In today's world, adults have orchestrated and over-organized sports so much that I wonder how fun it is for kids. I raise questions about 10 year olds traveling for club competition. It's sad that we need to remind the adults in the room to "let kids be kids." What they might not know is that is inhibits their ability to improvise, figure out the rules on their own, grow into their own understanding of the game and of competition.
2. Sibling Support. It's uncanny to me how many have a sibling, (in particular for women in basketball a brother) who they would join in pick-up games or unstructured practice. Tina Thompson, Cheryl Miller, Arike Ogunbawale, Ruth Riley and Sabrina Ionescu each credit their brothers (older and younger) as their favorite teammate. In tennis, I have wondered if you have Serena without Venus (and vice versa). In this instance, sibling rivalry is a good thing. As Cheryl Miller said about her brother Reggie "iron sharpens iron." He admits she's the best player in their family. With female basketball players, games against or with their brother usually--not always—means they were competing against a player who has more muscle mass and weight. This can be a benefit when participating in all female competition (again, this is not ALWAYS the case but in general this is true of men vs. women. For example, most female tennis players on the tour hire a male hitting partner to help them get fitter, hitting harder, faster and stronger).
3. Great athletes play other sports. I would love to see Thompson on the volleyball court! Undoubtedly, the skills that volleyball demands—blocking, hang time, jumping and digging —must pay dividends inside the paint. My dad's take on this point is that professional athletes are great athletes—period. I agree and I also think that one can sharpen the saw physically and mentally by engaging in other sports. Not only does an athlete engage in different ways of competing (pace, time, mental focus) but they are exposed to other coaches—their style, philosophy and demands. Jack Swarbrick, Athletic Director at Notre Dame admitted his preference for recruiting two sport athletes. Why? "We find these men and women are usually stronger in one sport than another. They learn different roles on the team given those two paradigms." In an increased world of specialization, the case for the two-sport athlete remains viable and worth considering. Do you understand my argument? Is it possible that all three commonalities are not necessary? Is anything missing? Discuss. Report back! Photo Credits Millers Arike Ionescu
