Sports and Intentional Change Theory

This week the discussion revolves around the success of US Women's Soccer and the Dream Team failures of US Basketball in the Olympics. Naturally these two sports are the sports that I have the least amount of interest in researching. Baseball wasn't an option? All grousing aside there are some lessons to be learned from the success and failures of these two teams.


Starting with failures: The 2004 US Men's Basketball Olympic team was, on paper, supposed to dominate the field...and they didn't. This article applies a bit of statistics to the team but the overall point is that the quality of the players changed. I tend to disagree, the players sent to the Olympics in 2004 were comparable to any other player in the world. However they were relatively new to international play and they were new "stars" in the US. I would argue that, according to Intentional Change Theory, their ideal self and real self were not the same "self." As the linked article above notes, scoring in basketball is dependent on having the ball in the first place. A given "star" on an NBA team can count on his teammates feeding the ball to him in order to score. This can lead to a self that appears to the player as "I am the man with the ball." However, when these "stars" get together the cohesive goal of giving the ball to the "star" begins to change. There are five "stars" on the court and the image of "being the man with the ball" crashes into the reality of "all these players want the ball and can use it." The court, during the game, is not the time to apply a learning program, evaluate mistakes or success, and find a support system as those steps take time, so they failed. Learning from those success the US Men's Team went on win gold in 2008 with the Redeem Team.


Comparing that the US Women's Soccer team has been dominate for nearly 30 years on the world stage. This fivethirtyeight article also breaks down some statistical data for women's soccer but I find this passage very telling, "So how did we get here? Basically, it boils down to two things: 1) Women’s soccer has been on a great run for the past 30-plus years in the U.S., to the point where it’s poised to become our most popular women’s sport, and 2) the rest of the world has been relatively apathetic and/or hostile to the women’s game." Additionally, US players make up over half the world's registered players. In the US women's soccer is very popular for young women and thus from an early age they begin to merge their ideal selves and real selves as soccer players. The same could be said for basketball players but I argue that the lesser spotlight cast on women's sports, while shameful, also allows for the players to develop themselves free from trying to be what others see them as. Whereas Carmelo Anthony has an image to protect many folks may have to look up the name Brandi Chastain. It may be that Brandi's ideal self and real self are very close to the same person.


The same could be said for Ronda Rousey's loss to Holly Holms. If one looks at her loss and reasons for taking the fight a case could be made that Rousey was trying to reconcile her ideal self with her real self. While it was physically painful for her to learn that merging the two is no easy task the lesson can apply to all of us. The ideal self may not be a bad "self" and neither may be the real self. However, when they aren't the same a state of dissonance can occur. Applying the ICT steps can take a person closer to making the two the same though I argue that a complete merger is impossible. Anyone thinking that they no longer have a need to grow is missing the point of growth.