The Differences Between Can't, Don't, and Won't (and the Magic of Yet)

Spoiler: It's Complicated But It's Important

I’m not going to tell you that certain words are off-limits to coaches. Instead, I want to encourage coaches to think through when and how they use some words. Specifically, I want to look at three words that coaches use among themselves and within themselves: can’t, won’t, and don’t.

The first thing to highlight is that coaches often, without realizing it, use these three words interchangeably. When they do, they lump together several kinds of outcomes and player behaviors that are best kept separate. There are important differences in how we treat situations in which players can’t do something, don’t do something, and won’t do something.

For this discussion, let me define what I mean for each word. When a player can’t do something, it is outside their current skill set or physical abilities. When a player doesn’t do something, it was possible for them, even if it was unlikely and/or the player made an effort but the outcome differed from what was expected/hoped for. When a player won’t do something, they make a decision not to do something that they may or may not be able to do. With those definitions in mind, let’s look at how saying and thinking one thing when the situation is ambiguous can affect coaching.

The first instance to consider is assuming that didn’t is the same as can’t. It’s easy to think of examples in which athletes truly can’t but I’m more interested in the situations in which success is rare and difficult. If coaches assume that success is more common than it truly is in a given situation, they can mistake don’t for can’t. While can’t means that the chance of success is 0%, being able to do something doesn’t mean that the chance of success is now 100%. But coaches may not consciously think about how likely success is in a particular moment, they may just think that success should be happening more frequently than it is so it becomes the player’s fault when they don’t with great frequency. The danger here is that coaches foreclose on the player’s ability to do at all just because the chance of success is currently low. Coaches might work through this by asking athletes to assess their own chances for success and by asking themselves what they believe the player is capable of or how often they should expect the player to be successful in that particular situation.

The next situation is assuming that couldn’t or didn’t is the same as wouldn’t. This is more complicated because it runs in both directions, coaches may mistake won’t for can’t but they may also mistake can’t for won’t as well. There is plenty of research that shows how people will protect their egos when faced with great uncertainty or difficulty. (I recommend starting with growth mindset research to see this.) Rather than face failure after investing themselves, they will instead avoid investing at all, guaranteeing failure but protecting their self image because they can believe that they didn’t only because they wouldn’t and not because they couldn’t. One way that coaches can help combat this is to nurture growth mindsets in players. This means helping players believe that they can be different in the future than they currently are and that they have some control over that change. Another way that coaches can work on this is to create environments in which experimentation and failure are supported (which is different than failure being condoned). An example of the difference between supporting failure and condoning it is how the coach responds to errors in training. Are the errors seen as feedback about what still needs work and help the athlete interpret that feedback? Or does the coach let the error pass without comment because they believe that there’s nothing to be gained by addressing it at all?

But we must also consider the possibility that players make valid efforts, even when they don’t get the desired outcome. Sometimes coaches assume that the main reason players don’t is that they won’t. Coaches often make this assumption in a very subtle way, believing that everything is within the control of the coach and/or player. No space is allowed for an opponent to make a good play, there is always something that could have been done so that the player could have been successful. In this scenario, the fact that the opponent was successful is evidence that the player didn’t and, since the player could have done something, then the logical conclusion is that the player wouldn’t. This situation is particularly difficult to recognize because it requires that coaches allow for chance, they have to admit that there are some things that aren’t in their control at some moments. My favorite way to work out of this mindset is to think/say something like, “sometimes the offense wins”. (For more about how I think about the role of chance in sport, read this.)

Overriding all of this confusion between these negative words is the clarity and possibility of one magic positive word, yet. I love yet. It keeps doors (and minds) open. It encourages growth and resilience. Pick one of the other words and add this magic modifier after it and see what happens. “This player can’t make that play” becomes “this player can’t make that play yet.” It creates the possibility in our minds, which is where all success must exist before it appears in the world. It encourages us to keep trying, to keep going. It gives coaches a simple way to show that they believe and that they care.

I encourage coaches to consider how they use these four words. They are small but they have big impacts on how the world looks. They impact how coaches view players and treat them. The power in these words should be managed with intention.