There are a few basic responsibilities that every coach has (I've listed them in the back of The Discovering Greatness Playbook). One of the biggest is The Courage to Adjust.
It's difficult. You go in with a game plan. You've practiced a set of plays. You've committed to a roster. But if your system isn't working, you need to have the courage to throw it out.
It's a common mistake that coaches make at all levels; they get so committed to the virtues of what they planned that their egos won't let them make the changes their team needs for victory. The stick with the starters who don't have their heads in the game; they run the same bad plays . . .
You know that's the definition of insanity, right? To keep doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result.
Youth Baseball Season is upon us (local sign-ups are next Saturday). If there's one thing that baseball, as a sport, does correctly, it's having the courage to make a change.
The rosters are designed for it: a variety of pitchers and hitters are available at the disposal of a well-prepared baseball coach. If a guy is having an off-day from the mound, pull him. Hey, in baseball we recognize that any pitcher can be out of rhythm. With no disparity or disgust, we simply shrug it off and give the next guy a chance. The success of the team comes first.
Sure, you may give a guy a chance to get into step, and you should, but if it's just not coming together you pull him. You'll give him a shot another day. No harm, no foul (like the pun?), you're still a good guy and a quality pitcher, today's just not your day.
In business, especially in tough times, we often wait too long to make a personnel change. We've got the wrong guy on the mound; we're running the wrong playbook. But we stick with it, our egos to big for us to acknowledge we've made a mistake. If we want to win, if we want to survive, we need to have the Courage to Adjust.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
J Mac
I write about and coach sports because I see the potential to uplift the human spirit.
One of the beauties of the Internet is that even if an event is "old" by news standards, through video posting and archiving it can reach a new audience any time.
One such video is that of young Jason McElwain's amazing basketball performance the one time he saw actual playing time. You've got to watch the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngzyhnkT_jY
Any honest viewer has to be impressed. And moved. It's these moments that sports are all about: to revel in the achievement of a hero; to see the underdog get his due. If you want to learn more about J Mac, check out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_McElwain
I'm grateful for the friend that told me about Jason so that I had time to share his story with my kids before the Superbowl. It gave the commercial he was in an added sense of triumph for all of us.
“Diem perséquere!"
Hunt the Day Down. Attack today. Go out and make it yours.
One of the beauties of the Internet is that even if an event is "old" by news standards, through video posting and archiving it can reach a new audience any time.
One such video is that of young Jason McElwain's amazing basketball performance the one time he saw actual playing time. You've got to watch the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngzyhnkT_jY
Any honest viewer has to be impressed. And moved. It's these moments that sports are all about: to revel in the achievement of a hero; to see the underdog get his due. If you want to learn more about J Mac, check out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_McElwain
I'm grateful for the friend that told me about Jason so that I had time to share his story with my kids before the Superbowl. It gave the commercial he was in an added sense of triumph for all of us.
“Diem perséquere!"
Hunt the Day Down. Attack today. Go out and make it yours.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Roids
Roids. As in Steroids, not Hemorrhoids, although the news of late has me thinking that the two words aren't that far apart . . .
What should be the response of league officials when an athlete tests positive for a banned substance? And should that response be any different if a confession is made?
The whole situation reminds me of Pete Rose.
Now wait a minute; hear me out. I'm a "rules are rules' kind of a guy. If the league has rules against the use of certain substances, or gambling, then the punishment must be carried out. And yet the Pete Rose situation has always bothered me. OK, the guy gambled on baseball, which is dumb. And yes, I get that the MLB is very sensitive to that particularly surrounding the Black Sox Scandal of 1919, but being Banned for Life from playing (especially after one has retired) and be kept from the Hall of Fame are two different things.
In the same regard, while I admire Alex Rodriguez for coming clean about his past steroid use, and think that his honesty merits a little leniency, something needs to be done. It's A-Rod's own words that trouble me the most, citing his reason for doping that he caved in to "pressure to perform".
What message does that send? What are kids supposed to take away from that?
Does anyone think that future Hall-of-Fame hopefuls aren't going to figure out that his "banned substance use" coincides with his move to the Texas Rangers, his record breaking seasons, and his $10-million-a-year deal?
Steroids will wreck your life (am I the only one that remembers Lyle Alzado?) and yet their use in professional sports is out of hand.
So what should be done?
In the case of Alex Rodriguez, I advocate fines. Fine him, fine the Rangers, and maybe even the Yankees. There's no question that A-Rod's income, and the income of both teams, is tied to his "enhanced" performance. What to do with the fines? A PR campaign? Maybe, but the bottom line is that kids need to hear "use the juice, and it's gonna cost ya".
Should A-Rod and other users be allowed to continue to play? I say "yes", so long as they submit to regular testing and stay clean. Hall of Fame? Maybe, but I strongly advocate erasing any statistics from any player's record that are the result of banned substances. Not just in baseball, but every sport. If we remove the batting averages and home runs from those Texas Rangers years will Alex still qualify for the Hall?
Not likely. But that's an appropriate response for irresponsible behavior. If Pete Rose can be kept out of the Hall for things he did outside of Baseball, Alex Rodriguez should have his induction influenced by the things he's done while playing.
And Hank Aaron should be re-crowned the rightful Home Run King.
Outside of Professional Sports, how much control should a company have over the off-time habits of it's employees?
None.
Unless those off-time exploits effect the workplace, as they are almost certainly bound to do.
Mangers and Owners need to first have rock-solid policies in place. Even in a small company you need a manual that clearly lays out a zero-tolerance while on-the-clock rule. While clocked in, you're liable for a lot of what they do, you've got to protect your business.
Habitual users of any drug are guaranteed to have their work performance and production effected. Suspecting someone of being under the influence and proving it are two wildly different things. They best tool you have may be regular performance reviews (which I recommend NOT tying to salary or wage increases), and by regular I mean "formal" and "at least quarterly". By focusing on an employee's performance, not your suspicions of drug use, you'll stay above any legal entanglements.
What should be the response of league officials when an athlete tests positive for a banned substance? And should that response be any different if a confession is made?
The whole situation reminds me of Pete Rose.
Now wait a minute; hear me out. I'm a "rules are rules' kind of a guy. If the league has rules against the use of certain substances, or gambling, then the punishment must be carried out. And yet the Pete Rose situation has always bothered me. OK, the guy gambled on baseball, which is dumb. And yes, I get that the MLB is very sensitive to that particularly surrounding the Black Sox Scandal of 1919, but being Banned for Life from playing (especially after one has retired) and be kept from the Hall of Fame are two different things.
In the same regard, while I admire Alex Rodriguez for coming clean about his past steroid use, and think that his honesty merits a little leniency, something needs to be done. It's A-Rod's own words that trouble me the most, citing his reason for doping that he caved in to "pressure to perform".
What message does that send? What are kids supposed to take away from that?
Does anyone think that future Hall-of-Fame hopefuls aren't going to figure out that his "banned substance use" coincides with his move to the Texas Rangers, his record breaking seasons, and his $10-million-a-year deal?
Steroids will wreck your life (am I the only one that remembers Lyle Alzado?) and yet their use in professional sports is out of hand.
So what should be done?
In the case of Alex Rodriguez, I advocate fines. Fine him, fine the Rangers, and maybe even the Yankees. There's no question that A-Rod's income, and the income of both teams, is tied to his "enhanced" performance. What to do with the fines? A PR campaign? Maybe, but the bottom line is that kids need to hear "use the juice, and it's gonna cost ya".
Should A-Rod and other users be allowed to continue to play? I say "yes", so long as they submit to regular testing and stay clean. Hall of Fame? Maybe, but I strongly advocate erasing any statistics from any player's record that are the result of banned substances. Not just in baseball, but every sport. If we remove the batting averages and home runs from those Texas Rangers years will Alex still qualify for the Hall?
Not likely. But that's an appropriate response for irresponsible behavior. If Pete Rose can be kept out of the Hall for things he did outside of Baseball, Alex Rodriguez should have his induction influenced by the things he's done while playing.
And Hank Aaron should be re-crowned the rightful Home Run King.
Outside of Professional Sports, how much control should a company have over the off-time habits of it's employees?
None.
Unless those off-time exploits effect the workplace, as they are almost certainly bound to do.
Mangers and Owners need to first have rock-solid policies in place. Even in a small company you need a manual that clearly lays out a zero-tolerance while on-the-clock rule. While clocked in, you're liable for a lot of what they do, you've got to protect your business.
Habitual users of any drug are guaranteed to have their work performance and production effected. Suspecting someone of being under the influence and proving it are two wildly different things. They best tool you have may be regular performance reviews (which I recommend NOT tying to salary or wage increases), and by regular I mean "formal" and "at least quarterly". By focusing on an employee's performance, not your suspicions of drug use, you'll stay above any legal entanglements.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Man Enough
People will gather at the water cooler today and boast about the greatness of their team. They'll use words like "miraculous" and "dominate". They'll string together superlatives as if they think there's an opening for Madden's job.
Some will talk about fairness and calls and challenges and penalties called and not called.
And that's OK.
It's all part of the social decompression that we need to do. It helps us feel more a part of the contest on the field. Monday Morning Quarterbacking? Call it what you want, but the camaraderie that is built upon the common ground of having witnessed the same event; around analysing its moments, momentum, and miracles, is a positive byproduct of the spectacle of sport.
What I worry will get lost amid the discussions, something that would have been mentioned in every article, commentary and column today had the game but slightly swung the other direction, is a little thing that happened just before kick off: Kurt Warner was awarded the "Walter Payton Man of the Year Award".
Awarded every year since 1970, the NFL's Man of the Year (Walter Payton's name added after his death in 1999, Payton himself winning the award in 1977) honors excellence on and off the field.
In a world where our media is dominated by the foibles of the rich and famous, this award recognizes the charitable community contributions of the recipients (as well as the 31 other nominees) every year.
Wouldn't it be great if every profession had a Humanitarian award?
If after the awards for best picture, actor, actress and director the highest honor was given to the celebrity who had done the most to help those in need?
The "Man of the Year" may not hold for Kurt Warner, or even for the rest of us, the joy of the Lombardi trophy, but I submit to you that, whatever team you follow, we should all be proud of the Cardinal's QB. For having served his community, he's Man Enough.
There are unsung heroes in our individual workplaces as well. On their time off the clock they volunteer as coaches, in homeless shelters, and food banks. They lead scout troops, teach skills and mentor young people. They help us move and move us to tears.
Maybe I'm caught up in the economy of the times, but I'd love to see public recognition of the everyday heroes by the big companies that employ them. They're easy to find. Today they'll be huddled around the water cooler.
Some will talk about fairness and calls and challenges and penalties called and not called.
And that's OK.
It's all part of the social decompression that we need to do. It helps us feel more a part of the contest on the field. Monday Morning Quarterbacking? Call it what you want, but the camaraderie that is built upon the common ground of having witnessed the same event; around analysing its moments, momentum, and miracles, is a positive byproduct of the spectacle of sport.
What I worry will get lost amid the discussions, something that would have been mentioned in every article, commentary and column today had the game but slightly swung the other direction, is a little thing that happened just before kick off: Kurt Warner was awarded the "Walter Payton Man of the Year Award".
Awarded every year since 1970, the NFL's Man of the Year (Walter Payton's name added after his death in 1999, Payton himself winning the award in 1977) honors excellence on and off the field.
In a world where our media is dominated by the foibles of the rich and famous, this award recognizes the charitable community contributions of the recipients (as well as the 31 other nominees) every year.
Wouldn't it be great if every profession had a Humanitarian award?
If after the awards for best picture, actor, actress and director the highest honor was given to the celebrity who had done the most to help those in need?
The "Man of the Year" may not hold for Kurt Warner, or even for the rest of us, the joy of the Lombardi trophy, but I submit to you that, whatever team you follow, we should all be proud of the Cardinal's QB. For having served his community, he's Man Enough.
There are unsung heroes in our individual workplaces as well. On their time off the clock they volunteer as coaches, in homeless shelters, and food banks. They lead scout troops, teach skills and mentor young people. They help us move and move us to tears.
Maybe I'm caught up in the economy of the times, but I'd love to see public recognition of the everyday heroes by the big companies that employ them. They're easy to find. Today they'll be huddled around the water cooler.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
