One-on-One Meetings

You’ll be hard-pressed to find another coach who is as universally revered as Dean Smith.

And I’m choosing my words carefully in that categorization. He is not just admired. He is not just respected. He is revered.

Have a listen to how some of the godly figures in coaching spoke about Smith:

John Wooden: “I've always said he's a better teacher of basketball than anyone else. I couldn't begin to teach players the things Dean has taught them. I've admired him because there's more to him than just wins.”

Bob Knight: “Let me say some things that he won't say. His being able to win all these games and do it at a single institution, do it through all the years without ever having a problem with any kind of recruiting violation or probation, is a very singular accomplishment in college basketball. It’s indicative of a guy who really knows how to coach and has decided from day one that things are going to be done the absolute right way.”

Mike Krzyzewski: “Dean set the standard for basketball that everyone is still trying to reach. He demanded that his teams play as one. And what he got in return from all these guys who played for him was the intense loyalty that they feel toward him. And that's something I've admired since I started coaching. It's really one of the great things in all of sport: that intense loyalty the Tar Heel players have for Coach Smith.”

The intense loyalty Smith received from his players was reciprocal.

Upon his death in 2015, his former players started receiving mail from Smith. He had instructed the executor of his will to send a $200 cheque to each of his former players, with a request that they use the money to “enjoy a nice dinner”.

Smith had roughly 180 former players, meaning he’d set aside $36,000 for them.

Part of how Dean Smith developed such deep relationships with his players is detailed in Chapter 17 of his book, The Carolina Way.

“I believed strongly in scheduled one-on-one meetings with our players,” Smith writes. “It was a good way to keep communications open as well as to learn what was going on with them. They also learned in greater detail what I was thinking about their overall college and basketball performance.”

How it was structured:

Meeting 1: when the player arrived on campus to begin the fall semester

Meeting 2: before the start of practice on October 15th

Meeting 3: after the annual blue-white scrimmage game in early November

Meeting 4: mid-December

Meeting 5: midway through the ACC season (early February)

Meeting 6: at the conclusion of the season

These meetings were scheduled in advance, and occurred regardless of what circumstances the player or the team found themselves in.

In essence, each player knew that they were going to get to spend time with Coach Smith every month.

(Remember: these are student-athletes who also had class, homework, social activities, family time, and sometimes other sports to participate in. Setting aside time outside of practice was not an easy task).

“In addition to these scheduled one-on-one meetings, others popped up from time to time on an as-needed basis,” Smith adds. “Also, if a player had a problem he needed to discuss, he could come see me immediately…even if it meant asking the governor of North Carolina to leave the office temporarily.”

Modern athletes are being engaged constantly by a whole whack of coaches, analysts, psychologists, performance staff, and administrators. They get face-time and meetings with lots of people in the environment, but the reality is there’s one person they all crave time with: the head coach. (This isn’t specific to athletes, we all want time with our boss).

Of the content of these meetings, Smith writes:

• “The players knew and honored this one rule about our one-on-one meetings: What was said stayed behind closed doors.”

• “One of our young payers asked to see me to discuss a problem he was having. ‘Coach, I want to break up with my girlfriend. How should I go about it?’ That was not part of the practice plan.”

• “I never conducted the talks in a way that pitted a player against one of his teammates, such as ‘To beat out Jerry, you must…’ That would have been counterproductive to building team play. If playing time was a concern, I told the player to work hard for improvement each day in practice.”

Smith would pre-load his calendar to ensure that these one-on-ones happened, and then he would use the time to deepen his understanding of each player.

“It was up to me to find out the best way to deal with each player on an individual basis,” Smith recalls. “For instance, during my one-on-one meetings with the players I asked each one if it would bother him if I criticized him in front of his teammates. I told him that if it would, I could bring him to the office after practice and do it. Waiting until after practice to criticize wouldn’t have been as effective, of course, but it was an option. I can’t recall any players choosing to do it that way.”

This is how Dean Smith built reverence among his peers. He cared, genuinely, and his actions matched his claims that his players were the most important thing to him.

Asked what he missed the most after retiring, he said: “practice, competitive games, late-game situations, and my relationship with our players.”

Cody’s Notes

• Scheduling regular one-on-one meetings is vastly different to having an ‘open door policy’ where you expect your players to walk into your office when they have a problem. Both are helpful, but they are not the same thing.

• I’ve observed multiple professional environments recently where players reported to me that they'd gone an entire season without having a single sit-down meeting with the head coach.

• Don’t forget: your staff want regular one-on-one meetings with you too!