The Sports Doc Chalk Talk

Roger Clemens is in court again, trying yet again to discretely exit out the backdoor and maintain his innocence while facing mountains of empirical and circumstantial evidence that clearly link him to banned and illegal steroids and performance enhancing supplements.  Once known to baseball fans as a role model, winning pitcher, and fearless competitor, today Clemens comes across as a coward — a person so terrified to ever being discovered having been a cheater that he has gone to unimaginable lengths to protect his less than glamorous past.

While countless baseball peers of Clemens have come clean and admitted to their guilt (even if they were essentially forced to do so), Clemens continues to hold a poker face and maintain that he never used any kind of performance enhancement supplement during his career.  Of course, Clemens, like anyone charged for a crime, is “innocent until proven guilty,” but there is so much going against Clemens denials and so much evidence supporting he used that it’s almost comical watching how far a man will go to preserve his name and reputation — that at least partially was built upon cheating.

I would imagine many MLB players, especially those who played during the time Clemens played, are quite bothered by the position Clemens is taking.  I would also suspect that those players who were caught during the steroid era in baseball are really troubled by the fact that there’s a good chance that Clemens will somehow squirm out of the charges against him, while they had to pay a terrible price through public humiliation and a tarnished reputation.  But not Roger Clemens — rather than “manning up,” as he used to do in pressure game situations, he continues to take the cowards route of denial.

While there is an extremely remote chance that Clemens never cheated, there are many factual pieces to this case that certainly refute his innocence, including the following:

• Clemens played in the steroid era — legions of players from this time have already been busted, and many more have talked about how widespread usage was amongst players.  We have learned in retrospect from players during the steroid era that the baseball culture during that time was filled with steroids and PED’s — and the ridiculous power numbers that have yet to be duplicated since the steroid era certainly support this claim.
• Clemens clearly became more fit as he aged, and his pitching numbers improved dramatically as well.  Never before – nor since the steroid era – have we witnessed baseball players getting bigger, stronger, and better as they aged. Father Time didn’t tap Clemens on the shoulder and grant him “special” abilities.
• There are stacks of medical reports and even DNA evidence connecting Clemens to steroid paraphernalia and unprecedented medical rehabilitation success.  In fact, every claim that Brian McNamee (Clemens former trainer) has made has been confirmed – even his claims about injecting Clemens wife with human growth hormone - but somehow he is lying about only one man – Roger Clemens?
• McNamee admitted under oath about Clemens’ usage, and Clemens former best friend Andy Pettitte has also confessed that Clemens used.  Pettitte has nothing to gain by making this claim, and is (was?) actually a friend of Roger Clemens. His testimony may end up being the most damaging in the end if Clemens is found guilty of using.
• Outside of Clemens and Barry Bonds (another player who squirmed out the back door rather than admitting his usage), nearly every player from the steroid era in baseball who used has either: a) been caught, or b) admitted to using.
• Finally, even though there is enough evidence out there already that shows Clemens is almost certainly lying, ask yourself how your gut feels about his innocence?  Is there any part of this case where you feel Clemens didn’t use?  While I would never suggest a person rely exclusively on intuition and “gut feelings,” I would encourage onlookers to trust those feelings, especially as they add to the already existing evidence that is almost impossible to refute.

Is Roger Clemens a role model?  Hardly.  Is he a coward who looks foolish trying to shirt from the truth, when he could simply come clean and help millions of young athletes learn about the dangers of steroids and performance enhancing supplements?  In my opinion, yes.  Is he an extremely wealthy former athlete with a good defense team that will probably get him off from these charges against him?  Sadly, probably so.

“The Rocket,” as artificial as that name now sounds, will probably remain intact and ride off into the sunset never admitting to cheating the game of baseball.  Unlike one of his former teammates, Alex Rodriguez, Clemens will not admit to any wrongdoing; and unlike Rodriguez and other players who have admitted using (including Andy Pettitte), he will never have the opportunity to be forgiven for his mistakes and poor decisions.  The truth is we all make bad choices in life, and none of us are perfect — but we have witnessed that by coming clean (like Rodriguez and Pettitte did), people do forgive and forget.  What people don’t like, however, is when a person is so obviously guilty yet still stands proudly rather than admitting to his crimes.  That’s exactly the position Clemens has taken, and it’s not only cowardly, but also a terrific missed opportunity for a fresh start and means to help better educate kids about playing right, playing safe, and playing with integrity.

www.drstankovich.com

Play right, play safe, and play with increased mental toughness — learn more at Advanced Human Performance Systems

I have been involved with many discussions this week around Ron Artest, and the overall big picture of sports aggression.  As I wrote about earlier this week, it’s not the emotion that gets players in trouble, but how they manifest their energy.  When players allow their emotions to take the form of negative actions (like hitting another player), bad things happen.  On the other hand, when athletes learn how to more effectively channel their emotions into positive and facilitative actions, good things almost always follow.

www.drstankovich.com

Learn more about mental toughness and how it can help athletes improve their focus, concentration, motivation, and resiliency – check out Mind of Steel today!

Los Angeles Lakers player Metta World Peace (Ron Artest for the purpose of this article) viciously blind-sided James Harden in the head yesterday, prompting sports fans worldwide to attack Artest for his aggressive play and history of sport-related violence and suspensions.  There is no doubt that Artest has a checkered past when it comes to keeping his emotions under control, as his record of getting into fights speaks for itself.  It’s also very understandable that many fans are tired of Artest’s behavior, and rightfully so, as a shot like the one he delivered yesterday could have easily have been a career-ending hit.  Looking at the bigger picture, however, it becomes a very interesting discussion when you examine how intimidation, hard (but fair) play, and deliberate aggressive/violent acts all enter into sports.  What’s good, right, bad, or wrong? (Sport Success 360).

There isn’t much debate that Ron Artest has struggled with his emotional development throughout his career — many times admitting to his problems through various interviews over the years.  In fact, Artest has even talked about his work with a psychologist, which I find quite admirable that he would seek treatment (even if he is still showing signs of his uncontrolled anger).  But what about the aggression your child shows in sports?  Does he have an “anger problem,” or is his level of mental toughness good for the sport he plays?  Does your daughter have an appropriate level of intensity, or does she seem to cross the line with occasional cheap shots?  Many parents ask themselves these types of questions everyday, wondering if their child might, too, have an anger problem similar to Ron Artest.

What makes this a challenging conversation in sports is the fact that so many sports are physical in nature — making the “line” somewhat blurry when it comes to appropriate and inappropriate behaviors.  Case in point: If somebody in the office chucked you hard as you made your way to the copy machine, not only would this be inappropriate, it might also lead to that employee being fired – or even sued.  In a sport like hockey, however, players are encouraged to knock down the opposing player heading toward a goal.  Same behavior, yet the behavior is viewed quite differently across settings.

In addition to aggression being a part of most sports, there is also an emotional factor that enters into play that is very different than our day-to day work.  In other words, many athletes become emotional while being in the heat of a battle, and quite often they engage in physical play through the emotional experience.  Occasionally, they cross the line while in this mind state.  Of course, this doesn’t justify “cheap play,” but it may help us understand some of the contextual cues that enter in to aggression in sports.

When it comes to your child and sports aggression, ask yourself the following questions to see how he or she sizes up:

• Is her aggression usually tied to winning the game (i.e. blocking a player out under the rim, or checking a player into the boards), or is it tied to simply being frustrated (like hitting an opponent after the whistle)?  The first type of aggression is instrumental aggression, while the second is called hostile aggression. If your child regularly engages in hostile aggression, you might want to pay close attention to the situation to see if she might need help with controlling her emotions.
• Does your child regularly seem to be in the middle of fights while playing?  Sport psychologists will often look at prevalence and trends when it comes to aggression in sports, and if your son is seemingly always in the middle of scuffles there could be a problem.
• Has your child been disciplined for sports violence/aggression before?  If so, and he continues to display the same behaviors, you may want to seek professional assistance as it appears as though the consequences are not curtailing the behavior.

www.drstankovich.com

Sport Success 360 – get your school or league signed up TODAY!

There is a delicate balancing act between integrity and success when it comes to sports fans and their desire to align themselves with a sports winner.  On the conservative side of the argument, it appears that some fans will tolerate very little from coaches/programs that lie, cheat, and break every rule of integrity in their quest to become a winner.  In these instances, the fan base believes that winning should come a distant second to “doing it the right way,” implying that playing by the rules is paramount to a credible sports program.  On the other side of this argument is the “win-at-all-costs” type of fan who could care less about playing by the rules as long as the team wins.  Rules, ethics, and sportsmanship are merely words to these fans, as the only thing that is really important is winning.

The reality is most people actually fall in between these two polar opposites – meaning most fans would like to win and play by the rules, but if the rules need to be tweaked a little (or conveniently overlooked) it’s still OK if the team is winning.  In some cases, sports fans feel the need to align themselves with a winner so much so that they will put on convenient blinders when their team/program gets in trouble.  The most recent example of this behavior is at Arkansas where Head Football Coach Bobby Petrino is catching fire for his less-than-professional behavior involving an extramarital affair with a 25 year old office staffer.  Conservative fans have already called for his resignation, while “win-at-all-cost” fans have minimized the incident as Petrino has proven to be a pretty good football coach on the field.  In fact, there have already been rally’s in Arkansas to save Petrino’s job!

The big question I have is why is there such an incredible desire by some sports fans to be a part of a winning program, so much so that many will completely overlook, disregard, challenge facts, or even fool themselves into thinking “nothing happened” when many of these stories break?  The urge is so strong to be aligned with a winner that these fans will not only tolerate, but even accept behaviors from their coach and athletic program that they would never tolerate or accept from a family member, friend, or employer.  But when it comes to sports, we commonly hear things like “It was no big deal,” or “Look at what other programs do.”  In some cases these fans even justify the crimes in their mind, pointing to the unjust system as the reason why it’s OK to break rules.

From a sport psychology vantage point, it makes perfect sense that we as people strive to be the best, and aligning ourselves with people and programs that exemplify excellence also makes sense.  The problem, however, is when this urge to be the best contaminates our objective, logical, and fair thinking — sometimes so much that we lose our own sense of what’s right and wrong in our efforts to defend “the winner.”  For example, take any one of the NCAA problems that have surfaced over just the past year alone.  If you were a fan of one of these schools, there is a good chance you minimized (or even outright dismissed) the “crimes” that were reported.  But how would you have reacted if the same thing happened at another school? Or how would you have reacted if the same crimes occurred at your rival school? Would you have reacted the same way?  Honestly?  Do you think the Arkansas fan base supporting Coach Petrino right now would think the same, no-problem-here way if these same circumstances happened at another rival SEC school?  I don’t think so, and neither do you.

My point here is to not to push a high and mighty position of moral authority, but to challenge sports fans to think about the relationship they have between winning and doing it the right way.  Where do you draw the line?  If you happen to be from the “who cares” so long as we win camp, is this the same set of values you would want your kids to espouse?  And if you are from the “win the right way” camp, have you set your standards so high that they are impossible to live by?

www.drstankovich.com

Spring sports means sports performance apps, and we have them plenty to choose from – learn more at Advanced Human Performance Systems!

With the NFL Bounty-Gate in the news, it prompted me to think about sports aggression and the differences between healthy, competitive hitting versus violent and illegal physical play.  The New Orleans Saints organization is paying a big price (especially head coach Sean Payton) for the bounties that were set by previous defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, yet some are arguing that the hits would have been just the same regardless whether they were done to receive bounty money or not.  After all, this is the NFL and aggression comes part and parcel with football, right?  Actually, sport psychologists identify two types of sports aggression, presenting an entirely different view of what may have happened in New Orleans.

For sports parents, this is a great opportunity to teach kids about how violence and aggression play into sports, including the differences between healthy and unhealthy aggression.  The two types of aggression commonly seen in sports, instrumental and hostile, are broken down in more detail below:

Instrumental Aggression

This type of legal aggression occurs in sports when an athlete is in pursuit of winning and playing within the competitive spirit of the game. The aggression, in actuality, is needed and used in order to make plays, stop the opponent, and ultimately win games.  This type of aggression is not designed to hurt players, or purposely knock opponents out of the game to make it easier to win. One way to think of this instrumental aggression is to think of the aggression as helpful, and not intentionally harmful.

Some examples of instrumental aggression would include a hockey player checking another player in order to get to a loose puck, a basketball player using his body to position for a rebound, or a baseball pitcher pitching inside to gain better control of the plate.

Hostile Aggression

This type of aggression differs from instrumental aggression in that the sole intention of hostile aggression is to hurt another player.  In these instances, the aggression is not directed at scoring points or tackling a player, but instead purposely designed to physically hurt another player. When you see a cheap shot in sports, most likely it’s an example of hostile aggression.  In  New Orleans, the aggression could be called hostile aggression as bounties are designed exclusively to “knock guys out.”

Helping Your Child Understand Sports Aggression

So how does your child stack up?  If she plays hard and within the rules of the game, then she is likely displaying instrumental aggression.  On the other hand, if your kid engages in aggression that clearly is designed to hurt another player, it’s likely he is using hostile aggression.  Of course, there are fine lines between these types of aggression, and the distinctions get even more blurred when you factor in the intimidation factor that plays in to many sports (like when a pitcher hits a batter intentionally to gain back the plate, opposed to simply “pitching inside”).  Still, most types of hostile aggression are easy to identify and usually result in penalties and suspensions when they occur.

In all likelihood, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell probably factored in the type of aggression displayed when he made his final decision with the New Orleans Saints.  In his mind, he saw the aggression as purposeful and designed to hurt players (and possibly end careers) — and how that type of aggression steers away from the competitive spirit of football.

Talk to your kids about the different types of aggression in sports, and reinforce instrumental aggression while calling out harmful and unhealthy hostile aggression.

www.drstankovich.com

Working in sports, I often hear stories about “out of control” sports parents — in fact, I have even seen a few as clients over the years (The Parents Playbook).  Usually what I hear are stories about parents yelling obscenities from the stands, with the occasional push/shove incident that (thankfully) ends quickly and before any physical harm occurs. Bad stories, yes; but they hardly compare to the attack that took place in Massachusetts last Friday — a melee so violent it left behind beat up coach with a chunk of his ear bitten off. Timothy Lee Forbes has been charged with beating up the winning coach, and biting part of his ear off — all this over a game.

Unfortunately this is not the worst story I have ever heard – the tragic “hockey dad fight” that resulted in a man being killed over a youth hockey game in 2000 is my watershed moment for when sports hit rock-bottom.   I remember thinking back then about what youth sports were becoming, and the fears I had that a new threshold had been established pertaining to sports anger. Since then, aggression at youth sporting events has become so normalized that we hardly react to many of the ugly stories we hear.

When I played youth sports in the 1970′s and 80′s, the worst thing I ever witnessed was an occasional rude remark from the crowd (generally over an obvious blown call by the referee), or a momentarily angry coach who might grumble a profanity under his breath. I never saw a fight, and I can’t remember even seeing an argument that looked like it might turn into a fight.  Sports were fun and people seemed to “get it,” as evidenced by their appropriate fan etiquette.

Sadly, it seems we have become desensitized to youth sport aggression these days.  Similar to how school shootings rarely make the front page of the news, neither does the violence in youth sports that results in serious injury, and sometimes even death.

Sport psychologists often help athletes with developing mental toughness, but perhaps the bigger task is to recalibrate the climate at youth sports so that violence will not be tolerated by administrators, coaches, parents, or players.  The recent fight that occurred in Springfield should serve as a reminder of how far out of whack things have gotten over the years, and inspire us to prevent aggression and violence at youth sports games in the future.

Help create a positive and safe culture in your league with Sport Success 360!

www.drstankovich.com

Are there “politics” in sports? 

ABSOLUTELY!

But aren’t there “politics” in almost every aspect of life, too?  What I mean is that anytime you have people left to make subjective opinions and appraisals you are going to inevitably have others who don’t agree with them.  This may not be “fair,” but I’m not so sure that it is even possible to be fair to all the people, all the time.

In my view, there are actually two types of “politics,” and I break down my thoughts on each below:

A.) Normal Politics: This is the kind of bantering I hear from some parents who feel their kid is better than the kid starting ahead of him.  This is normal, and expected, and really only shows that a difference of opinion regarding athletic abilities exists between the parent and the coach.  In my mind this really isn’t even “politics” as it’s more of a case of a coach simply using his or her best judgement evaluating talent, but we’ll leave it as a form of politics for now.

B.) Unfair Politics: This type of politics occurs when a coach has clearly treated a child unfairly, and is more a question around morals and integrity than it is a case of a coach simply making a judgment call.  For example, if several kids on a team were suspended from school earlier in the day for the same violation, and then in the game later that evening one of the student athletes was allowed to play while the others weren’t, this would certainly not be anywhere close to being fair. Another example of unfair politics might be a coach continuing to play a known ineligible player — again, this is a very different example from a coach who makes talent evaluations that you don’t always understand (or like).

Neither type of politics are easy for parents, but I would urge you to distinguish the differences between the two.  Keep in mind that if you are upset because the coach made a different decision about your kid starting than what you would have made that’s OK, but even if he would have selected your kid then another parent would be feeling exactly how you did!  In other words, coaches really can’t win in those situations.

On the other hand, when coaches blatantly abuse the trust and fairness that should be in place with the team and create new and special rules for some kids, then you may have a situation that warrants a higher degree of involvement (possibly from an Athletic Director or League Operator).  The idea here is not to make the situation worse, but to protect the integrity of the program if a coach is clearly abusing the responsibilities he or she has with coaching.  The good news is that the type of politics most parents complain about, ironically, has to do with judgement calls around talent and not direct and intentional decisions that treat kids unfairly.

The “politics” in sports are really no different than the politics we see in many other areas of life, including job promotions, voted award winners, and students selected to colleges.  In life, it’s sometimes difficult to acquire objective, measurable criteria needed to make fair decisions, leaving us to make decisions with the information that is made available.  In some cases this information is incomplete, so making “perfect” decisions is really nearly impossible when you think about it.

While sports politics are tough to deal with at times, these situations can also be great teaching tools to use with kids.  Teach your child about how politics are a part of life, and that the true test is developing resiliency and coping skills to weather the tough times.  When kids keep their heads up and their spirits high, they will be more ready for that next opportunity in life where they might become the benefactor of a “political” decision that goes their way!

www.drstankovich.com

As a college sports fan, do you ever wonder where all the corruption, loss of integrity, and sometimes outright cheating originates?  More specifically, I am talking about the stories about student athletes receiving improper benefits followed by extremely light penalties  from the university?  Alvin Kamara’s recruiting experience with the University of Alabama might just provide us with many of those interesting answers.

It should be noted that to date Kamara is still an uncommitted high school junior RB from Georgia and has done nothing wrong, nor has he been accused of any wrongdoings to my knowledge.  Similarly, as bizarre as the story you are about to hear sounds, apparently Alabama has done nothing wrong yet, either.

It was reported today that Alabama is so incredibly interested in recruiting Kamara that they sent him 105 recruiting letters…in one day.

The Invincible College Recruit

Of course, in this day and age where amateur athletes receive many more valuable “gifts” than recruiting letters, this story seems at first to be nothing more than funny.  Upon closer inspection, however, it becomes much easier to see where the future potential problems lie after this stunt, and how blurred the paradigm between university and student athlete has just become due to Alabama’s actions.  Some might say this “genie” isn’t going back in the bottle anytime soon.

When student athletes are recruited to colleges there is a normal ego rush in learning that they are one of the select few to be chosen to play at the next level.  The job of the coach, and athletic department at-large, is to entice the athlete to choose their school, and to do this they usually give the recruit the royal treatment.  As you might expect, there are always potential problems during this process, most notably when the psychological paradigm between college and player shifts so dramatically that the player knows he actually calls all the shots.  In these instances, the athlete becomes infallible, invincible, unstoppable, and inevitably “the man.”

Assuming Alabama lands Kamara, can you see how upside-down this relationship has already become — even before he has attended his first practice??  How do you say “no” to the kid you gushed over so badly that you sent him 105 letters in one day??? How do you maintain the same discipline measures for this player as you do the walk-on players, or even any of the other scholarship student athletes from the other teams at Alabama?  This kid’s “different,” remember?

The Difficulties in Enforcing Discipline

If Kamara chooses Alabama and he eventually messes up, is it fair to hold him 100% responsible for his actions after his college treated him like Elvis during the recruiting process?  After all, this young man has been developed into a superstar by Alabama’s letter writing campaign (amongst other things) — and when 18 year old student athletes feel like this, it’s pretty easy to see why they sometimes make really bad decisions based on their self-perceived invincible status.

For the institution (Alabama in this case), how will they play by the rules if Kamara chooses their school and then goes out and breaks rules and laws?  How do you come down on a guy when this is the same guy you laid rose pedals at his door?  He came because of the royal treatment you gave him, and now you want to discipline him??  You want him to play by the same rules as every other player, but you didn’t treat him like that during recruiting — so why now the change? You did everything you could to make him feel immortal, and now you want him to be held accountable and responsible?? I mean, you sent him over 100 letters in one day telling him that he could walk on water, eat fire, juggle chainsaws, and leap tall buildings in a single bound —- and now you want him to comply with those silly NCAA rules and regulations???  If I’m Kamara and this eventually happens, I want to know who changed the game?

Kamara and Alabama are not the only examples of this warped psychological paradigm that often develops.  Letter writing campaigns like what was recently done at Alabama happen at other schools, too (or some other similar practice).  The student athlete is given the keys to the castle, while the university sports administrators and coaches nearly break their collective necks trying so hard to not look or notice when rules are broken.  I mean, how do you crack down on the new “money man” for your school?

How Does a Responsible Coach Really Act “Responsibly?”

Responsible coaches know the importance of playing by the rules and maintaining the integrity of the sport, but they also know that you don’t just roll up that red carpet you had out for the top recruit, throw it in the back of the van, and then all of a sudden crack down on him.  No, it doesn’t work that way — remember, this kid can transfer so you better learn to become aloof and look the other way — it pays better if you do.

Coaches also know that if you don’t roll out the red carpet and surf & turf dinners, then you probably won’t land him, as there are hundreds of other coaches out there that will spoon feed his every need if it results in an eventual signing.

“Amateur” sports are really an impossibility when you think of them in these terms.  In order to get the best kids you have to be over-the-top, outlandish, endearing, and full of promises.  Some might even say you have to sell your soul to the devil. But after the young man signs, it is expected that you alter the landscape and coach-player dynamics 180 degrees, and “hold the young man accountable” for his actions.  Then, when a kid screws up, society wants to blame him and hold him accountable — but the reality is he was never held accountable from the start of the recruiting process!

Unfortunately, this model simply doesn’t work, and it’s really obvious the reasons why.

www.drstankovich.com

Terrell Owens recently claimed in an GQ interview that he is “friendless, broke, and living in hell.”  Assuming Owens is being truthful (and it’s understandable if you don’t believe him after witnessing all the drama around Owens throughout his football career), he appears to be in big trouble as he retires from professional sports.  Sadly, this type of sport retirement reaction is not uncommon for athletes, although you typically only hear of it when it happens to famous athletes (like Owens).

Some fans might think this is fitting for Owens, as he was easily one of the most obnoxious and narcissistic athletes to ever play professional sports.  It was also reported that Owens has been behind on his child support payments for his kids, even though he made tens of millions of dollars while playing — yet another reason to not have much sympathy for Owens.  Still, even many of TO’s harshest critics, including ESPN personality Skip Bayless, are showing sincere concern about Terrell Owens mental health.

These Troubles are not Unique to Owens

It is very common for athletes to experience confusion about their personal identity at the ends of their careers, and re-adjusting to their new identity in society can be quite challenging.  After retiring from sports the big paydays go away, as do most of the fans and social support system.  In Owens case, transitioning from “TO” the football icon to Terrell Owens, public citizen, appears to be destroying his post-sports life.

T.O. is on the brink of self-destruction, and he desperately needs immediate professional attention.  The sport retirement transition can be lonely and isolating, and without a support network of caring people around to help, it can be a life-threatening transition. Many athletes struggle coping and turn to drinking, drugs, risky behaviors – and even suicide.  Owens fits the prototype of an at-risk athlete, and his latest confessions provide even more evidence of just how confused he is today.

Unfortunately, stories like T.O.’s are not unique to just “big-ego” athletes, or even professional athletes — there are tens of thousands of college and high school athletes each year who experience the same loss of identity, role confusion, and depression commonly associated with the end of a sports career.  It’s easy to see why when you think about it – young athletes these days often specialize in one sport early in life, and sometimes play that sport year-round with few breaks.  As a result, they essentially become an athlete by developing an exclusive self athletic identity, as well an exclusive athletic social identity (how others view them).  When this identity ends (sport retirement), it is often an abrupt change that was not welcomed or prepared for by the athlete.

Why Sport Retirement can be so Difficult

One of the best ways for athletes to cope with sport retirement is to use their support system, but in most cases their support system quickly disappears.  Since the athlete is no longer part of the team, hanging out with players becomes difficult (if not impossible), and fans lose their interest with the athlete’s fleeting fame.  Some athletes prepare ahead of time for their inevitable sport retirement, while others only begin to deal with transition when it eventually happens.

Examining Owens, the hope is that he seeks professional sport psychology assistance and commits to working hard on his post-athletic career.  If he does this, he will likely find happiness and success after the NFL.  I say this as he appears to be a bright guy, has an unbelievable work ethic, and his worldwide visibility will always command attention (and opportunities) in the future.

If you know an athlete facing sport retirement, check out Positive Transitions for Student Athletes!

www.drstankovich.com