Hi, this is Ray.

Quick observation from this year's World Cup. Watch any of the elite teams during a match (really watch them, not just the ball, but the whole team in motion), and you'll see something that's almost invisible if you're not looking for it. The players are constantly communicating. Not just yelling. Pointing. Gesturing. Calling out positions. Quick eye contact before a pass. Tactical signals that have been drilled into them over months and years. Even when the ball is at one end of the pitch, the players at the other end are working… reading the game, calling adjustments, repositioning, maintaining shape.

This communication isn't extra. It's the actual mechanism of how the team works as a single intelligent system rather than eleven individuals running around. The collective knowledge of a great team is genuinely something more than the sum of its individual knowledge. When the team has played together long enough, knows each other's tendencies, has shared mental models of how to handle situations, they can do things no individual player could do alone. The famously tactical teams (the Spain of 2010, the Germany of 2014, the great Brazilian sides of various eras) are doing collective cognition in real time on a pitch.

I bring this up because it points at something most adult learners get wrong. We tend to treat learning as an individual project. Me, the material, my notes, my apps, my willpower. Solo. The football teams know something we've forgotten: that some of the most powerful learning happens in groups, that the right kind of collaboration multiplies what any one person can do, and that even the most individually talented learner is missing something if they're always working alone.

Today's newsletter is about that. What football teams know about collective learning that individual learners often miss, what the research actually shows about when group learning beats solo learning, and how to apply this even if you don't have a team of teammates around you. Let's get into it.

Picture this. A buyer opens ChatGPT and asks for a recommendation in your category. Your competitor's name comes up. Yours doesn't. And that buyer never makes it to your website.

That's happening right now in markets everywhere. And most teams don't know it's happening because it never shows up in their analytics.

HubSpot AEO shows you exactly where your brand stands in AI search, where competitors are getting recommended instead of you, and tells you specifically what to fix. No expertise needed.

Try it free for 28 days. Just $50 a month after.

Let me start with the data, because this is one of those areas where the popular wisdom and the research mostly agree.

According to one major review, there is persuasive evidence that cooperative teams achieve at higher levels of thought and retain information longer than students who work quietly as individuals. This isn't a small effect. Across dozens of studies, properly structured collaborative learning consistently outperforms solo learning on outcomes like critical thinking, problem-solving, and long-term retention. The benefits hold across age groups, subjects, and contexts.

A more recent study with prior-knowledge analysis found a nuanced picture worth knowing. According to the researchers, while more knowledgeable collaborating and individual learners performed equally well in the learning phase and the delayed test, on the retention test, collaborative groups demonstrated better performance. In general, collaboration benefited learning compared to individual learning in complex tasks, but performance depended on the learner task-specific prior knowledge. The collaboration benefits show up most clearly on COMPLEX tasks. For simple drilling and memorization, solo work can be perfectly fine. For anything requiring real thinking, integration, problem-solving, application (the kind of learning that actually changes how you think) groups outperform individuals.

This maps directly to what football teams do. The simple individual skills (shooting a ball, kicking with both feet, basic ball control) can be drilled alone. But the complex skills (reading the game, making the right pass at the right moment, defending as a unit, attacking with coordination) can only be developed in team contexts. The solo training prepares the player. The team training is where the actual game-relevant skill gets built.

Let me get concrete about what makes elite team learning work, because not all "collaboration" produces the benefits the research describes. Bad group work is worse than solo work. The structure matters a lot.

Shared mental models. Great football teams have internalized common frameworks for how to read situations, make decisions, and act together. When a defender steps up to press, the rest of the back line knows what to do… not because they've been told in the moment, but because they've spent thousands of hours building shared understanding of how the team responds in that situation. The shared model means individual decisions cohere into coordinated action without needing verbal instruction every time.

For learners: when you study with a group, the goal isn't just to do the same work in the same room. It's to develop shared understanding of the material that lets you build on each other's thinking. This requires explicit conversation about how you each understand things, where you disagree, what frameworks you're using. The group becomes valuable when its members have built shared mental models, not just when they've been near each other.

Specialized roles with overlapping awareness. A central midfielder and a fullback do different things on the pitch. They have different specialized skills. But they also both understand each other's roles well enough to cover for each other, predict each other's movements, and step in when needed. The specialization makes each player excellent at their role. The overlapping awareness makes the team function as a unit.

For learners: in a good study group, you don't all have to be experts at the same things. You can each have areas of strength, with enough overlap that you can teach each other. The person strong on theory teaches the person strong on application. The person who finds the patterns in the math helps the person who struggles with patterns but excels at the proofs. Specialization plus mutual understanding produces collective capability.

Constant low-stakes feedback. During training, football players are giving each other feedback constantly. "Square ball!" "Time!" "Man on!" "Switch!" Real-time information that helps the receiver make better decisions. The feedback is so constant that the players barely register it consciously, but it's continually shaping their performance.

For learners: the value of a learning group is partly the volume of feedback you get. Solo, you only get feedback when you finish something and someone evaluates it. In a group, you get feedback continuously… someone reacts to what you said, asks a clarifying question, offers a different perspective, corrects a misunderstanding. The high feedback density is what makes group learning more powerful than solo work for complex material.

Pre-built trust. This is the one that takes the longest to develop and matters the most. Football teams that have played together for years have a level of trust that newer teams can't match. They know that when they make a pass, the teammate will be where they expect them to be. They know that when they take a risk, others will cover. The trust isn't sentimental. It's a functional resource that enables higher-risk, higher-reward play.

For learners: study groups that have been together for a while develop similar trust. You become willing to ask the dumb questions, admit confusion, propose half-formed ideas, expose what you don't know. This requires that the group has earned each other's trust over time. New groups are often less effective than established groups, not because the members are different, but because the trust hasn't accumulated yet. Invest in keeping a learning group together over months and years if you can… the compounding effects are real.

Here's where the research gets really interesting for self-directed learners. Group learning isn't a substitute for solo learning. The most powerful approach combines them in a specific order.

According to a recent controlled experiment, participants who prepared individually before engaging in collaborative learning scored significantly higher than those who engaged solely in collaborative or individual learning, suggesting potential advantages of individual preparation for collaborative learning. The researchers tested three conditions: solo learning, group learning, and group learning preceded by individual preparation. The third condition outperformed both of the others. Group learning alone wasn't enough. Solo learning alone wasn't enough. The COMBINATION (solo prep then group engagement) was what produced the strongest outcomes.

This maps exactly to how football teams work. Players do individual skills work (gym, technical drills, video analysis, personal training), and then come to team training where they apply and integrate it with the group. The individual work prepares them to participate in the team work. The team work surfaces gaps in their individual work, which they then address solo before the next team session. The cycle compounds.

For learners: the optimal pattern isn't choosing between solo and group. It's combining them deliberately. Do your individual reading, individual practice, individual reflection. Then bring what you've learned to a group context where you discuss, debate, teach each other, and surface gaps. Then go back to solo work to address what came up. Repeat. This combination produces more learning than either mode alone.

The football team also has someone the solo learner usually doesn't: a coach. Or several. And the coaching function (covered in previous newsletters but worth revisiting here in the context of teams) is qualitatively different from what teammates provide.

A coach has perspective that participants can't have. They can see the whole field, identify patterns across many sessions, prescribe targeted practice for specific weaknesses, and provide accountability that peers can't match. The football team has a coach AND teammates because the coach and the teammates do different things. Neither alone is sufficient.

For learners: when possible, have both. A coach (formal teacher, tutor, mentor, or paid expert) who can see what you can't see and direct your practice. AND a peer group who can learn with you, provide constant feedback, and serve as a sustained learning community. The combination is more powerful than either alone. Most adult learners try to substitute one for the other, or skip both entirely. The football teams know better.

Let me name specifically what you lose by always learning alone, because the gaps are bigger than most solo learners realize.

You miss the question you didn't know to ask. When you study alone, you can only investigate questions that have occurred to you. When you study with others, they ask questions that surprise you… pointing at things you'd taken for granted, surfacing assumptions you didn't know you'd made. The questions other people generate are often the most valuable input you get, because they reveal blind spots in your own thinking.

You miss the correction you didn't know you needed. When you study alone, you can confirm your existing understanding indefinitely without ever being corrected. With others, your wrong understandings get exposed (gently or not) when they conflict with how others see the material. The correction is often uncomfortable. It's also often the most important learning moment available.

You miss the variety of approaches. Different learners have different intuitions, different background knowledge, different angles on the same material. Studying with others exposes you to approaches you'd never have generated alone. Even when other people's approaches are wrong, the exposure to alternative framings improves your own thinking.

You miss the social accountability. Solo learners quit more often than group learners. Not because they lack discipline, but because nothing external is pulling them back to the work when their motivation flags. A group provides social accountability… people who expect you to show up, who notice when you don't, who keep the project alive when individual motivation alone wouldn't sustain it.

You miss the joy of collective discovery. This sounds soft, but it matters. Learning hard things with other people is more fun than learning hard things alone. The shared "aha" moments. The collective frustration when something doesn't click. The eventual breakthrough that everyone celebrates. These social dimensions of learning aren't just nice… they're part of what makes sustained learning possible over years.

If you're a solo learner who's been doing everything alone, here are some practical moves to capture some of the team-learning benefits:

Find one regular learning partner. You don't need a whole team. One reliable person who's learning something adjacent to what you're learning, who you meet with regularly to discuss, debate, and share. The two-person learning unit is small but powerful.

Join one community related to your learning. Online or in-person. A subreddit, a Discord, a meetup group, a course cohort. You don't have to be deeply embedded. Even peripheral participation provides some of the question-generation, alternative-perspective, and accountability benefits of group learning.

Use a structured peer-discussion format. When you do have group time, don't just chat. Use formats that produce real learning. Take turns presenting what you've learned. Debate specific questions. Quiz each other. Critique each other's work. The structure prevents the group time from becoming socializing-while-pretending-to-study.

Invest in one coach when stakes are high. Even a few sessions with a qualified coach at strategic moments in your learning will produce returns that pay back many times the cost. The coach is doing something genuinely different from what peers can do. When you can afford it, do it.

Maintain the same group over time. Don't constantly cycle through learning communities. The trust and shared mental models that make group learning powerful only develop over months and years of working with the same people. Find your group. Stay in it.

Here's what I want you to take from this World Cup. The teams you're watching aren't just collections of talented individuals. They're collective cognition machines that have spent years building shared understanding, mutual trust, and coordinated action. The collective is something more than the sum of the individuals, and the individuals are better than they'd be alone because of the collective.

This is true for learning too. The individual study is necessary. It builds the foundation. But beyond a certain level, what makes learning go deep is the group context where ideas get tested, perspectives get exchanged, gaps get exposed, and trust accumulates. The solo learner who never engages with others hits a ceiling. The group learner who never does individual work doesn't build the foundation that makes group work valuable. The combination is what wins.

If you've been learning alone for a long time and feeling like you're plateauing, please consider that the missing ingredient might be other humans. Not as instructors. As fellow travelers on the same road, doing the same work, asking different questions, catching each other's blind spots, holding each other to the project over time. The team is the multiplier. The team is the thing.

You can't field a World Cup squad by yourself. You also can't learn at your full potential by yourself. Find your team, even if it's just two people. Start there. Build from there.

Even Frodo had Sam. Even Aragorn had the Fellowship. Even Mbappé has eleven teammates and a coaching staff. None of them did it alone. Neither should you.

Keep learning (and keep finding your team),

Ray