I like this theory on planning and preparation. Mainly, because as each juncture passes it leaves you with many “outs”, the ability to change direction without wreaking havoc on your program. In my case, games are penciled into the season plan, then depending on results of these games the sprints can take different forms or direction. This type of planning allows you to manipulate risk in a safer fashion, rather than all eggs placed into the one/two baskets! I’m currently working in a situation where in the coming weeks we have two games approaching- win both of them and we can proceed with a low risk high reward strategy, win 1 lose 1 and we must go with a medium risk strategy and lose both and we must take a higher risk strategy. These three different scenarios will produce three very variant “sprints”. The beauty of agile periodization is that it allows you to change direction with seamless efficiency which is perfect for team sports IMO. Really like the way you are modelling this Mladen!
Thanks for commenting Trevor. Yes, in-season sprints could/should be time between games (e.g. 1 week) and game should considered MVP. The blocks preceding season should have similar structure with in-season where some type of MVP needs to be delivered at the end (i.e. friendly game or in-house game) that could be used to help planning the next sprint.
The only thing to keep in mind is to still have the big picture in mind and not jump bandwagons based on game outcomes/performances. Just use it to “adjust” the big picture. 🙂
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.