What role does idolatry play in the training industry?
So much is pushed out about an instructor having a resume. Were they a navy seal, cop, MMA fighter, grand master, black belt, etc?
Rarely does someone ask if they can teach. Shouldn't this be in the equation? Somewhere near the top? Why isn't it? In the end, someone being able to teach isn't something to idolize. A sub 1 second draw is. A trident is. Tattoos and cool beard is. A youtube channel with lots of followers is. No one asked about Phil Jackson's illustrious career as a basketball player. Yet he made better basketball players better than he could ever be. Isn't this our goal as instructors? Ultimately, it would lead to less "street cred" because we aren't top dog anymore. Curiously, this isn't the case in any other sport arena. Boxing coaches push out awesome boxers all the time that didn't do much at a pro level. Where is the disconnect for those IN the industry?
People starting out firearms training schools is a good thing. Yes, you can throw a rock and hit one. That being said waiting for PatMac (or pick your other national level trainers) to teach the masses is the wrong approach. While the person that has been shooting for 2 years might not be the BEST to start a school they are better than the other option. (Limited opportunities like it was in the 00s) These people are usually local, available, and affordable.
While we get in purity battles what actually matters gets lost in the shuffle and that is who we are actually doing this for. At the end of the day there just aren't enough of the guys with relevant experience that can/will teach those that want to learn. In that vacuum some concessions have to be made. At one point learning from the Gracie/Fadda family was the only way to learn jiu jitsu. That had to end for it to grow. I believe we are there now as a firearms training collective.
Thoughts anyone?
So much is pushed out about an instructor having a resume. Were they a navy seal, cop, MMA fighter, grand master, black belt, etc?
Rarely does someone ask if they can teach. Shouldn't this be in the equation? Somewhere near the top? Why isn't it? In the end, someone being able to teach isn't something to idolize. A sub 1 second draw is. A trident is. Tattoos and cool beard is. A youtube channel with lots of followers is. No one asked about Phil Jackson's illustrious career as a basketball player. Yet he made better basketball players better than he could ever be. Isn't this our goal as instructors? Ultimately, it would lead to less "street cred" because we aren't top dog anymore. Curiously, this isn't the case in any other sport arena. Boxing coaches push out awesome boxers all the time that didn't do much at a pro level. Where is the disconnect for those IN the industry?
People starting out firearms training schools is a good thing. Yes, you can throw a rock and hit one. That being said waiting for PatMac (or pick your other national level trainers) to teach the masses is the wrong approach. While the person that has been shooting for 2 years might not be the BEST to start a school they are better than the other option. (Limited opportunities like it was in the 00s) These people are usually local, available, and affordable.
While we get in purity battles what actually matters gets lost in the shuffle and that is who we are actually doing this for. At the end of the day there just aren't enough of the guys with relevant experience that can/will teach those that want to learn. In that vacuum some concessions have to be made. At one point learning from the Gracie/Fadda family was the only way to learn jiu jitsu. That had to end for it to grow. I believe we are there now as a firearms training collective.
Thoughts anyone?