Learn across domains. General McChrystal understands hard problems.
In Team of Teams, General Stanley McChrystal writes that adaptation begins with brutal honesty. Not self-criticism for its own sake, but the courage to ask:
-
What assumptions are we making that may no longer be true?
-
Is our current approach still working?
-
And if either answer is unfavorable, what must we change?
Teams become stagnant not through laziness, but through complacency. Yesterday’s winning habits can become today’s liabilities when the game changes, the league changes, or the roster changes.
Great programs update themselves. Stale programs defend the past.
Why Good Programs Stop Winning
Every coach wants a simple answer; the truth is seldom simple. When a program stops climbing, the root causes usually fall into three domains: people, strategy, and operations.
1. People (Players, Coaches, Culture)
-
Talent pipeline shifts: graduation hits harder, or recruitment/retention dries up.
-
Player development stalls: athletes plateau because their habits and coaching aren’t compounding.
-
Culture erodes: accountability frays, complacency creeps in, roles blur.
-
Coaches stop evolving: the game changes while the staff stays in place.
At its core, programs are built - or broken - by people.
2. Strategy (Play Style, Development Plan, Scheduling)
-
The league gets better. You don’t schedule tougher; your opponents do.
-
Your play style no longer fits your personnel.
What worked for four seniors doesn’t fit two sophomores and a 6'1" forward. -
Player development isn’t aligned with actual needs.
Teams train what they like, not what the game demands.
3. Operations (How We Do What We Do)
Programs often fail not because of philosophy, but because of execution:
-
Practices aren’t efficient.
-
Film sessions don't address needs.
-
Standards soften.
-
Communication gets fuzzy.
-
Staff collaboration weakens.
The machine gets a little squeaky - and then suddenly it’s slow.
How Do We Ask the Hard Questions?
Every program hits this crossroads eventually. The good ones diagnose without ego.
Internal Review (Trusted Peer, Staff Member, Former Player)
Advantages:
-
Knows your system and your blind spots
-
Understands context (kids, town, league)
-
Invested in your success
Disadvantages:
-
Too close to the problem
-
May tell you what you want to hear
-
Shared assumptions go unchallenged
This works best when the relationship has radical candor and mutual trust.
External Review (Consultant, Outside Coach, Mentor)
Advantages:
-
No emotional attachment
-
Doesn’t care how you “used to do it”
-
Can compare you to other programs
-
Challenges sacred cows
Disadvantages:
-
Lacks the full context
-
May miss nuance about your roster or school
-
Harder to implement suggestions without buy-in
A good outside evaluator asks questions you stopped asking years ago.
The Courage to Change
Adaptation demands humility. General McChrystal often said:
“The enemy gets a vote.”
In basketball, the game itself gets a vote. So do:
-
Budget/fundraising
-
Enrollment
-
Graduation cycles
Technology (are we staying current?)
-
The rising strength of your league
-
Player expectations
-
Modern skill demands
Standing still is not an option. Every season is either renewal or erosion. The teams that thrive aren’t the smartest - they’re the most honest.
