Many thanks to Neil Sheehy for a worthwhile two days!

When I was a young athlete, there was a common belief that you should always be careful to keep your emotions in check.  No matter what was going on in the game or tournament, it was always best to operate at about level 7.  Not too high, not too low; always poised and under control.  Indeed, this misapprehension is still propagated by coaches today.  I recently heard, for example, an ex football coach and current commentator, lambast an NFL rookie who was overcome with excitement after scoring a pre-season touchdown.  “Act like you’ve been there before, for goodness sake,” he said. 

Well, hang on a second.  This player is a rookie.  He has never been there before.  Isn’t he supposed to be enthused?  Isn’t that the point?  Unfortunately, most coaches, sports psychologists, and even parents innocently misunderstand the meaning and message behind the illusion of level 7.  Hopefully I can clear things up here. 

It will always be unproductive for an athlete to try to control his or her emotions.

What many mentors today fear (for good reason) is that, in moments of emotion, the athlete will act foolish or be disrespectful to his or her opponent.  Also, these mentors often believe that those individuals who manage their emotions have a better chance at success.  The truth, however, is that the more we try to control our thoughts, feelings, and actions, the more we actually reduce or chances of remaining composed or coming through in the big moment.  May sound different, but I promise you it’s true.

When an individual acts out or acts up (the opposite of poise), the behavior is purely a result of his or her state of mind at that moment.  Actions born from clarity and quiet will always be productive.  Actions born from insecurity and confusion will always be just the opposite.  Therefore, in asking the above player to cap his exuberance, our commentator is mistakenly taking the player’s state of mind as a given.  It may not be what the commentator would have done, but if the rookie’s celebration was spawned from lucid thinking, then it can’t be wrong.  If it was spawned from muddled thinking, then it can’t be right.  It’s as simple as that, and only this understanding will prevent unnatural or over-the-top celebrations in the first place.

It is fun to feel excitement; the possibilities are endless.  Why would an athlete ever want to smother this sentiment?

Furthermore, the more a player tries to fight innate feelings of exhilaration, the more he will get out of sorts and fail to produce. Why?  Because when free will is inhibited, our perception of life becomes distorted, thus it is impossible to behave productively.  Besides, whoever said that flat lining emotion was supposed to be part of the human experience?   When you are deeply immersed in an activity, it is suppose to be thrilling; you’re meant to be high.  If success is what you are looking for, the worst thing you can ever do is suppress your own awe-inspiring feelings.  You have heard the expression, “Your just getting in your own way,” haven’t you? 

Finally, at the risk of sounding like I approve of ill-mannered celebrations, I hope you now see that the more we attempt to stifle them, the more unseemly they will become.  Plus, the more an athlete tries to stay on an even keel, the more he thwarts his own instincts, and the worse he will perform.  Instead, the secret to respect and achievement will always rest in an athlete’s understanding of his own state of mind in the moment, and his ability to remain true to himself.  It has absolutely nothing to do with “acting, or better yet, pretending like you’ve been there before.” 

So, my suggestion to all athletes is this: get out on the field, ice, court, or course and express your freedom fully.  Just be aware of the quality of your own thinking—is it clear, secure, empowering?—before you do.

Following last week’s article, I received tremendous feedback.  Many of you are intrigued with the unique coaching paradigm introduced, and just about all of the examples presented in your e-mails perfectly exemplify this simple approach.  Some of you, however, asked me about the viewpoint of the athlete.  That is, what is the best learning methodology through which an athlete of any age can learn, grow, and perform consistently?

Well, I believe that there are two primary learning methodologies at our disposal today.  One pervasive approach to learning is tremendously ineffective in most situations.  The other however, is a revolutionarily simple approach that provides the potential for long-term development and success. 

So, let’s look at these two learning methodologies through the prism of an 18-year-old baseball player named Billy.  Billy is the number one freshman recruit on his college’s baseball team.  He is a two-time, high school all-state shortstop.  His hard work and natural talent have carried him to the top—until now.

The Grinder.

Over the course of his baseball life, Billy has diligently consumed quite a bit about the game.  As fall practices commence at college, he is brimming with baseball knowledge.  He’s ready to go.  In fact, even if he were to stumble, Billy is secure in knowing that his former coaches, or books he’s read on the sport, possess plenty of essential information.  He can simply refer back, put the time in, and relearn.  He also expects to learn, by rote, all of his new coach’s requirements and strategies.  Hence, here is Billy’s plan for preparing for his college baseball career: he will industriously review all of this baseball data—analyze, organize, and practice or rehearse, over and over again. 

Unfortunately, this methodology represents the way that 99 percent of scholars, students, and athletes prepare for presentations, exams, or athletic contests.  It is the epitome of logical processing and mechanical execution.  Sound concepts are recycled, memorized, and strength of will is applied.  In this paradigm, however, creativity and insightful opinions are virtually nonexistent.  Growth and prolonged success will not occur.  Without the ability to adjust and imagine, Billy’s thinking eventually becomes twisted.  His physical talent and intensity will not stand up against the heightened level of collegiate competition.  Thus, the high school hero might be washed up at the tender age of 18.

The New Learning Paradigm.

On the other hand, what if Billy were to apply his eagerness and desire for success to a more basic, natural, and responsive methodology?  Here, as fall practices get going, Billy puts what he has learned about baseball on the back-burner.  He actually assumes he knows little about the game; he starts fresh.  Then, as his coaches begin to impart their viewpoints, Billy looks to remain unbiased.  Like a small child, he lives full of wonder, and he constantly seeks to soak up more.  Billy studies or memorizes little.  Instead, he asks questions, practices enthusiastically, and draws intuitive conclusions.  He continually reflects on these concepts and remains open to any and all possibilities.  Billy’s thoughts are fluent; he feels content.

Through this paradigm, Billy’s inner wisdom evolves.  He is prepared for anything and ready to compete freely.  No matter the outcome, he cannot fail.  Playing college baseball is the natural progression from his high school success and another step in his personal development.

Which methodology would you choose?

The grinder bases all of his learning on the power of his brain.  He painstakingly examines and reviews all data—past and present, in order to prepare for the future.  Yet, with thoughts racing, the grinder stumbles in the face of stiffer competition.  With the new paradigm, the athlete possesses the same amount of talent and desire as the grinder, but he exists in such a pure state of mind that he’s never caught off guard.  He inquisitively ponders, changes it up when things go astray, and separates himself from the rest of the pack.

The grinder looks for facts. The player—who understands the innocence of the new paradigm—listens for a feeling.  The grinder becomes befuddled by intellect; the clear thinking player remains spiritually attentive.  One methodology is structured and limiting; with the other, the athlete goes with his gut.  Therefore, if you’re looking for the most productive way to learn, grow, and perform consistently, the answer is simple.  At some point, knowledge and effort, void of feeling, have little value.  And like Billy the grinder, will only get you so far.

Late last month, I was presenting a coaching seminar to a group of high school football coaches, and we got on the subject of coaching styles.  Many members of the audience insisted that one size doesn’t fit all.  As one of the coaches said, “There are many ways to coach successfully.”

While I certainly agree that different players, at times, need to be mentored based on their specific needs, I disagree with the above perspective. Believe it or not, I think that there is only one basic understanding that will lead to impactful and long-term coaching success.  To illustrate this point, let’s take a look at three popular coaching methodologies, plus a ground-breaking fourth.  

The Dictator.

Methodology number one is the coach who sees himself or herself as a dictator.  It sounds silly, but this paradigm is extremely common.  The “my way or the highway” type coach may have concern for his players, but he mentors strictly from ego and attempts to mold athletes into his shrouded personal vision.  This coach generally maintains a strict code of conduct and eschews the suggestions of others.  He is often revered as holding true to his convictions when his team wins.  Unfortunately, this methodology always stifles creativity and free will, so when the team ultimately fails (which will happen every time), this coach is criticized for being pig-headed or narrow-minded.

The Manager.

Methodology number two—the manager—appears to be a more sound approach.  This sort of coach seems to care deeply as he seeks to manage the behavior of his players.  He wants players to be dependable and holds them responsible for their actions.  This coach makes statements like: “I expect you guys to know the difference between right and wrong.  If you slip up (on or off of the field), you’re on the bench.”  He judges what is appropriate and mentors accordingly.  On the surface, this coach seems to relate to the individuality of his players.  Yet, because productivity can never spawn from judgment, he loses respect.  Under the manager’s guidance, player development and success is fleeting at best.

The Guru.

Methodology number three is pervasive in the self-help world today.  This sort of coach fails to understand the inner workings of the human mind.  If a player, or any individual, isn’t on top of his game, this coach offers an external tool, technique, or how-to.  By providing coping mechanisms to illusionary problems, the guru persuades the player to become a passive victim to life itself.  Sadly, this coach’s disquieting strategies trick the player into looking outside for answers; he becomes a follower.  Hence, there is no hope for the player to stand up when counted on.

The New Paradigm.

Now let’s look at the revolutionarily simple methodology number four.  Here is an all-together new paradigm revolving around the state of mind of the athlete, coach, and team.  This coach starts off by clearly setting boundaries, but these standards are based on his own values and his feel for the team, not external viewpoints or insecurities.  Because he is fully aware that all human beings exist at changing levels of psychological functioning (state of mind), this coach will never hold his players accountable to their behavior.  He holds them accountable to the understanding that productive actions result from fluent states of mind, and unproductive actions just the opposite.  This coach never attempts to motivate his players.  Instead, he shows his players that the ability to be motivated rests within them.  As a result, the potential for growth and long-term success always remains within reach.

Make the New Paradigm your own.

Well, which type of coach (leader, teacher, parent) do you want to be?  The dictator bases all of his decisions and actions on his own self-worth and insecurity.  This limited viewpoint thwarts independence and growth.  The manager mentors by innocently attempting to control behavior, but players become resistant and respect dwindles.  The guru fails to see that our difficulties arise entirely from our low moods.  He provides learned survival strategies that suppress inner wisdom.

With the new paradigm, however, the coach looks within to find the answers and asks his players to do the same.  He understands that his emotions are born from his varying states of mind and his own thinking, not from the world around him.  His players learn and prosper from this liberating example.  So, while you are definitely encouraged to put your individual stamp on this innovative approach, I am certain that it is the one and only path to long term coaching success.  I urge you to find glimpses of it in the history of great mentors.  Then grasp it and try it for yourself, you won’t be disappointed.

Last week I received a call from the father of a collegiate athlete whom I have worked with for two seasons.  The father said his older boy (my client) was doing well, but he needed some advice on handling the plight of his younger son—Matt (I have changed his name).

The father was concerned about an incident that had occurred after a Little League game.  Twelve-year-old Matt was pitching in the first game of a best-of-three series for the area’s championship.  And in spite of being the strongest competitor on the team, he got shelled and the team lost 7-2.  Things were so bad that in the sixth inning Matt complained of stomach pains and was removed from the game by his coach.  After the game, as Matt struggled to pack up his equipment, he threw his batting helmet in frustration and broke down and cried.  Both the coach and his parents tried to comfort him but to no avail.

While Matt’s experience is certainly unfortunate, it presents a good example of what I consider to be a serious flaw in the mentoring strategy of both parents and coaches as they attempt to guide young athletes.  Indeed, this example carries through to player–coach relationships at all levels of sports today. 

Parents and coaches commonly preach to youngsters about the significance of external situations, such as athletic contests.

So what was the strategy?  First, both Matt’s parents and coaches insisted as much as a week before the game that this final series was “HUGE!”  “This series will show the world what we are made of,” said one of the coaches.

“Let’s show the other team how a real pitcher dominates,” exclaimed the father.

Then, after the loss, as Matt’s disappointment festered, both parties offered contrary consolation: “It’s just a baseball game; it’s not the end of the world.  There is always tomorrow.”

In fact, as Matt’s actions continued to spiral downward, his parents’ advice became dictatorial:  “You can’t act this way; it’s embarrassing.  You must learn the difference between right and wrong!”  On the way home, they even insisted that Matt write a letter of apology to his teammates and coaches for his wayward behavior.

What?  I thought the game was HUGE!  I thought it was the biggest thing since the 1969 World Series.  That being the case, why wouldn’t Matt throw a helmet and sob?  From this state of mind, how can he possibly understand that there is always tomorrow?  Is he really supposed to apologize for giving his heart and soul to the cause of showing the other team “what he is made of,” failing, and then suffering inside?  Indeed, as you probably already know, this type of quandary is quite common in youth activities today, and most of us have no idea why or what to do about it.

When any individual lacks the freedom to think and act for himself, inner confusion and thus errant performance is a certainty.

You might be surprised, but I started out the call with the father by asking: “What exactly is Matt supposed to do?”  I then explained that his son is so internally perplexed that there is little wonder he didn’t perform up to his potential, both during and after the game.  Instead, in preparing to pitch, why not allow Matt’s competitive instincts to kick in, or not, on their own?  Why not let Matt develop his own insightful strategy to get ready?  Then, after the game, why not merely allow Matt to be upset (or elated) and move through it in his own personal way?  I hope you see the drastic inconsistency in indicating to an athlete that his performance is pretty much life and death, and then insisting just the opposite when he acts that way.

Now, before you claim that I am condoning erratic conduct, let’s also examine the self defeating tendency of this mentoring strategy, and why inner confusion and outer antics will always result.  Quite simply, the minute an individual looks to an external source for inspiration or consolation, revved up emotions rule, consciousness plummets, and success becomes all but impossible.  It is this understanding that undeniably explains Matt’s bound up performance and the errant attitude that ensued.  Believe me, he knows the difference between right and wrong. 

Only when athletes are encouraged to be themselves will they find purpose through sport.

Finally, I am not saying that young people do not crave—and require—quality role models and guidance.  What I am saying is that mentors need to start allowing young performers to produce, not consume.  Motivation or coping strategies (for athletes of any age) based on external judgments thwart individuality and breed nothing but followers.  And while competitors like Matt will never be happy about an apparent failure, once they begin to act from their own a free will, I can promise you that creativity, leadership, and productive behaviors will become the new standard.  Thus, no matter how “huge” the game is, solutions to challenging circumstances, or lessons from testing outcomes, will always be found.

Dallas Cowboy rookie Dez Bryant’s recent predicament has really made me think about the subject of hazing at all levels of team sports.  From high school to the pros, rookie initiation rituals are pretty much the accepted practice—I would be embarrassed even to mention some of the things that went on during my freshman hockey season at Hamilton College.  Indeed, this subject came under scrutiny last weekend, during mini-camp, when veteran Roy Williams ordered Bryant to carry his shoulder pads off the field.  Bryant’s defiant reply: “No way, carry the pads yourself!”

As a result, many individuals in the sporting community, including  commentators, coaches, and former players, are criticizing Bryant for his refusal to comply.  “Everyone else went through it—why not him?”  “Who does he think he is, being disrespectful to the veterans?”  “It’s just what rookies have always done, it’s tradition, and we can’t really call it hazing.”

Well, what exactly would you call it?  Bryant didn’t sign up to be Williams’ lackey.  And if he possessed the reasoned conviction to stand up to this divisive behavioral pattern, how can anyone disagree?

I am surprised that so many athletic insiders disagree with Bryant’s decision to say no to hazing.

Now, I am not saying that athletes who initiate or go along with this pattern are wrong.  I will never tell a player how he or she should behave.  Instead, I will always hold my clients accountable to the understanding that our actions should result from a clear state of mind, never vice versa.  

For example, I was once talking with the captain of a high school hockey team about this very topic of rookie hazing.  He was confused about whether or not he should enforce the “degrading” chores and assignments, required of his younger teammates.  I asked him how he felt when he was a freshman, and forced to fill water bottles and start up the showers for the older payers.  He responded, “I hated it, and not because of the chores, but because I didn’t have the nerve to say no.”  In other words, it wasn’t the rookie rituals that produced his awful feelings; it was taking part in the rituals against his inner values and convictions that served this purpose.    

As long as a decision comes from an individual’s inner clarity and quiet, it can’t be wrong.

Here is the real life lesson behind the Dez Bryant controversy—it is never our circumstances that regulate our thoughts, feelings, and ultimately our decisions and performances.  It is always our level of clarity about the circumstance at that particular moment.  Therefore, provided Bryant’s declination spawned from lucid thinking (and not disquiet or insecurity), I say good for him.  It’s about time a player listened to his own gut on the subject!   

Lastly, you might be interested to hear that after my meeting with the aforementioned hockey captain, he decided to join the rookies in their daily tasks and pretty soon everyone, from star player to fourth liner, was pitching in.  It’s no accident that a talented newcomer led the team in scoring that year, and the team made it all the way to the state quarter-finals.  For the same reason, I’m anxious to follow Bryant’s rookie campaign and the plight of the Dallas Cowboys this season.  Because when individuals possess the freedom to be themselves, as well as the inner understanding about when to speak up; respect, harmony, and awesome performances are usually right around the corner. 

For years, athletes, coaches, parents, pro teams, etc., have searched for the secrets to unlock optimum athletic mental performance.  Today, however, in spite of a myriad of tools, techniques, and theoretical models, consistent success and contentment, on and off the field, are as elusive to the sports world as ever.  We see young athletes pushed so hard that 70 percent quit organized athletics by the age of 13.   It seems like every day a high school, collegiate, or pro athlete, is making headlines for his or her errant behavior.  Not to mention, talented players repeatedly failing to deliver in the so-called ‘clutch.’ 

While many insist that athletics is a great way to learn life lessons and expand life skills, this development is simply not taking place.  Now, in “Why the Grind?”–The Future of Athletic Mental Performance, Garret Kramer, the founder of Inner Sports, provides a revolutionarily simple explanation and understanding.  In a fluent and readable manner, Kramer reveals the innate principles behind consistent performance and success, as he highlights the misalignment between the experience of athletes and the strategies of the coaches and psychologists who are trying to help them.  Kramer uses real life examples to explore such questions as:  Where does effort truly come from?  What is the zone and what we must do (or not do) to get there?  Why willpower won’t work?  What is the difference between insight and intellect?  Are goals really useful?  Why the best mentors focus on state of mind and not behavior?  And, what is the connection between competiveness, contentment, and one’s level of well-being?  

Virtually all individuals—athletes and non athletes alike, are looking outside of themselves, hoping to unlock the keys to success and happiness.  In “Why the Grind?” Kramer shows us to look within to finally find the answers.

Late last week, I was speaking to a successful client who was struggling with thoughts about the impending end to his professional playing career.  He called me because he wasn’t feeling good about things and, at the moment, simply couldn’t decide whether or not the time had come to call it quits.  He believed that I could shed some clarity on the situation.

I pointed out to him that because mounting thoughts about external influences—a smaller contract, new teammates—were taking him farther and farther away from a good feeling, he would be better off putting the supposed issue on the backburner until he was in the proper state of mind to deal with it.  He agreed.

However, he then made the following (all-too-common) statement regarding his current issue: “This too shall pass,” he said.  For some reason, these words just didn’t sit right with me.  So, here I want to discuss the reason why, and what I believe we all can learn from this apparent dilemma.

Our lives do not get better once a difficult situation passes.

First of all, upon my own reflection, I saw that while this saying sounds right, and we have all heard it many times, it was the thinking behind these words that was actually preventing my client from finding his own insightful answer.  That is, it occurred to me that there is nothing that takes place in our lives that truly needs to pass.  So-called problems are merely born from our own errant thoughts, during our own low moments.  In this case, my client actually believed that his life would get better when the negative situation cleared and a career decision was made.  My role was to demonstrate to him that the quality of his life does not exist at the mercy of this or any other external situation.  Once he understood that, I was certain that he would uncover the appropriate choice about his career, and then things would start to fall in place for him.

The freedom that comes from understanding that nothing needs to pass is what guides us through our apparent difficulties.

You see, as I reminded my client, all of life’s circumstances are impartial and exist totally dependent on our state of mind at the moment the circumstance occurs.  How many of us have looked at a situation one day, and it seemed like the end of the world, but on the next day we look at the exact same situation and wonder what we were thinking in the first place?  In other words, it’s never the situation that needs to pass; it’s our state of mind that can and will pass, if only we allow it.

The lesson here is that if a smooth and successful path through life is what we are after, we must understand that our ability to learn or grow from any difficulty has nothing to do with the circumstance and everything to do with us.  Thus, the more we try to shrug off or alter our thoughts about the difficulty, the cloudier the answers become and the worse our performance gets.

Lucky for my client, he ultimately realized this truth and then found the freedom to make the appropriate decision.  In fact, he decided to get back in the gym and give his playing career one more year.  Wouldn’t you know it—his general manger reached out two days later and now wants to talk about some additional performance bonuses.  As I said, nothing needed to pass after all! 

Yesterday I received a joyous call from a baseball client.  A pitcher, this player first came to see me about two months ago because, in spite of numerous nerve-calming exercises prescribed by his team’s sports psychologist, he was struggling with his performance on the mound.  Believe it or not, he judged that his lack of success resulted from fearful thoughts about being struck by a “comebacker.”  Out of nowhere, he became scared of getting hit with a ball while in the process of finishing his pitching motion.  So, he was having difficulty throwing strikes.  And the more this athlete tried to rid himself of, or settle the fearful thoughts, the worse his performances (and the fear) were becoming.

The understanding that erroneous thoughts and feelings have no power to hinder our performances rests within all of us.

During the call, he explained that he took the mound in his previous start with the same fearful thoughts.  Yet, when the umpire yelled, “Play ball,” he simply reared back and threw a fast ball right down the middle for a called strike.  Eleven pitches later and still fearing the comebacker, the pitcher realized he’d retired the opposing team 1-2-3!  Hence, in my client’s words, that night he made the “amazing discovery” that it was possible for him to perform to the best of his ability, in spite of the errant thoughts and feelings running through his brain and body.

Indeed, over the course of the previous two months, this player and I had had numerous discussions about the principle of thought.  We talked about the illusionary quality of this principle.  He learned that negative thoughts, on their own, are entirely unbiased and will only persist if we fail to recognize our level of well-being at that time.  And while I certainly didn’t want him to be afraid, my role was to show him that these thoughts and feelings were completely neutral.  They had no ability to encumber his performance, or his life, in any way.

Popular self-help tools, techniques, and books perpetuate the delusion that our thoughts about our circumstances are real and need to be dealt with.

As an example, think about an external circumstance in your own life that (like the comebacker) you believe possesses the power to bring you down or hurt your chance for success.  Maybe it’s your coach, your boss, your parents, your contract, an illness of a loved one.  Then ask yourself: Does this circumstance always thwart my ability to perform?  Does the circumstance always produce errant thoughts and feelings inside of me?  If you truly reflect, I am 100 percent certain that the answer is no.

You see, it’s never the outside world—the comebacker or the coach—that restricts our opportunity for success.  Only our own fluctuating thoughts, born from our current state of mind, can serve this purpose.

In reality, the fear of the comebacker didn’t always cripple my client.  When his mood was high, fearful thoughts came and went; when his mood was low, fearful thoughts stuck.  Therefore (in spite of what pop psychology might offer), it will always be ineffective to seek coping mechanisms for paper tigers that we construct, regardless of the circumstances of our past, present, or future.  Once you discover that wayward thoughts are self-created and have nothing to do with the situation at hand, you will also discover that the more you try to alter or calm these thoughts, the more real they will seem, and the greater the odds that you will trip come crunch time.

Understanding the principle of thought is the key to navigating smoothly through life and performing to the best of our ability.

So about now, you are probably asking yourself: “Okay, this perspective really feels right, but how do I know when to pay attention to my foreboding thoughts?  These thoughts have to have merit sometimes, don’t they?  Well, the answer is simple: how do you feel at that moment?  Are you clear, resolute, determined?  If so, I encourage you to follow these thoughts and your instincts, whatever they may be.  My client simply knew that the opposite was the case.  He became afraid and lacked determination because an external factor and an errant state of mind were running the show, not his inner wisdom.

It is also important to recognize that at no time during my work with this player did I recommend the proper self-help method or technique for him to make his insightful discovery.  This insight spawned from his personal interpretation of the principle of thought and his own gut intuition.  I simply reminded him that fearful thoughts have no power to thwart his performance as an athlete.  Eventually, that notion felt right to him, and thus “the discovery” was born.

My hope then is that we all realize our potential to make a similar discovery.  When anxious thinking defiantly rears its ugly head, we must remember where these thoughts originate and appreciate what they are trying to tell us.  For we will always find consistent success and contentment when we understand the innate principle of thought, and thus discover (like this pitcher) that there is nothing “out there” that we ever need to fear.

Like most of the sporting world, I sat and watched Lebron James’ TV spectacle last Thursday night.  I have to admit that it caught my interest.  And while, like many who watched, it was my hope that he would remain in Cleveland, I certainly respect, and will defend, James’ right to play for a team of his choosing.  My concern for this young man moving forward however, is his lack of understanding about the state of mind from which productive decisions are made and success is ultimately born.

You see, a proper choice has little to do with the facts about the choice itself.  It all comes down to one’s level of clarity and feeling in the moment of choosing.  That is, an appropriate decision may feel right and good, or it may feel right but not good; yet, it will never feel as James stated Thursday night- “difficult.” 

For example, and speaking from my own personal experience, when I proposed to my future wife Liz after only two months of courtship, it felt right and good.  When we watched our son get wheeled into surgery last December, it felt right but certainly not good.  Neither choice was difficult, nor did they require any complicated intellectual processing. 

Our best decisions come from inner clarity and quiet, never from outer wants or cravings.

To me, the difference between the decisions above, and James’ decision Thursday night, is that my choices fortunately sprang from my own inner wisdom.  I did not feel that there was an external stake in either choice for me personally.  Sure, I wanted to spend as much time with Liz as possible, and I wanted our son to be healthy, but these desired outcomes were born from love and grace; qualities that are innate to all human beings.  To the contrary, according to James, his choice of leaving Cleveland spawned from outer wants and cravings- a championship, a hip city to live in, etc. 

To be clear, I am not saying that James does not possess inner wisdom.  I am simply aware that I have stumbled in life when I heeded my own misguided thoughts about external temptations, as opposed to my inner voice and feelings.  You may disagree, but I am fairly certain that a person who is seeing and feeling the big picture or oneness of life would never say: “I had to make the best decision only for myself.”  Or, “..the only reason I play basketball is to win championships.”  It is impossible to operate from an elevated level of well-being and only think of yourself, and clearly there exists a whole lot more to playing any professional sport than winning championships (in truth, this understanding is what allows us to win championships in the first place).

An athlete can create whatever type of success he envisions, provided he doesn’t make the quest about himself. 

Unlike James currently, I believe that the modern pro athlete who best exemplifies the above perspective is Drew Brees of the New Orleans Saints.  Now, here is a player who like James, yearned to win a championship.  However, Brees made his Super Bowl quest about the revitalization of the city in which his team plays, not about him.  Thus, he had a much easier time manifesting exactly what he was after.  In other words, when we make what we want less about us and more about what we all want (harmony, contentment, resiliency, achievement), we have a much better chance of making fluent choices and creating exactly what we are striving for.  Lebron James may or may not win a title, but unless he understands what’s going on in his own head and listens calmly to his own heart, this dynamic athlete won’t create much of anything else for anyone else, including himself.