Re: "Time to reset things here"

[takethepoints]

Well, the mods wouldn't allow a direct reply, so here goes.

This line of reasoning has some good points. There is no justification for directly abusing either coaches or players in the terms the post mentions. However …

This is also a chilling of speech here. Every now and then - like, say, now with Tech football - it is time to lean back, spit on your hands, and call an espada an espada. This is particularly the case with the present coaching regime. It has been one of consistent failure to deliver on any of the promises made a few years ago. Indeed, if anything, the program has declined during the last 3 years, not progressed (pace, Collins). Now, if the mods are perfectly willing to hear a frank discussion of how our football program has decayed, then well and good. The problem is that the post conveyed a clear message that such discussions are now more likely to lead to problems for those who post them.

Is this the case? Or not?

 

[bobongo]

Well, the mods wouldn't allow a direct reply, so here goes.

This line of reasoning has some good points. There is no justification for directly abusing either coaches or players in the terms the post mentions. However …

This is also a chilling of speech here. Every now and then - like, say, now with Tech football - it is time to lean back, spit on your hands, and call an espada an espada. This is particularly the case with the present coaching regime. It has been one of consistent failure to deliver on any of the promises made a few years ago. Indeed, if anything, the program has declined during the last 3 years, not progressed (pace, Collins). Now, if the mods are perfectly willing to hear a frank discussion of how our football program has decayed, then well and good. The problem is that the post conveyed a clear message that such discussions are now more likely to lead to problems for those who post them.

Is this the case? Or not?

I didn't get that from the post at all. Nobody's trying to regulate speech, just the manner of speaking.

 

[UgaBlows]

Well, the mods wouldn't allow a direct reply, so here goes.

This line of reasoning has some good points. There is no justification for directly abusing either coaches or players in the terms the post mentions. However …

This is also a chilling of speech here. Every now and then - like, say, now with Tech football - it is time to lean back, spit on your hands, and call an espada an espada. This is particularly the case with the present coaching regime. It has been one of consistent failure to deliver on any of the promises made a few years ago. Indeed, if anything, the program has declined during the last 3 years, not progressed (pace, Collins). Now, if the mods are perfectly willing to hear a frank discussion of how our football program has decayed, then well and good. The problem is that the post conveyed a clear message that such discussions are now more likely to lead to problems for those who post them.

Is this the case? Or not?

It’s their forum- if they want to chill the speech it’s their prerogative. That being said, what i got out of it was that everyone needs to chill out with the name calling and extreme negativity.

 

[orientalnc]

Well, the mods wouldn't allow a direct reply, so here goes.

This line of reasoning has some good points. There is no justification for directly abusing either coaches or players in the terms the post mentions. However …

This is also a chilling of speech here. Every now and then - like, say, now with Tech football - it is time to lean back, spit on your hands, and call an espada an espada. This is particularly the case with the present coaching regime. It has been one of consistent failure to deliver on any of the promises made a few years ago. Indeed, if anything, the program has declined during the last 3 years, not progressed (pace, Collins). Now, if the mods are perfectly willing to hear a frank discussion of how our football program has decayed, then well and good. The problem is that the post conveyed a clear message that such discussions are now more likely to lead to problems for those who post them.

Is this the case? Or not?

This is not the case.

The mods don't have the time (nor the interest) in proof reading every post for name calling, disrespect, and foul language. This is something we do to help keep the forum alive. We do it because we like the lively discussion. I think all of you are adults who have been around the block more than once. You should be able to make your points in an intelligent manner.

One more thing. All of the mods are long time fans of GT football. We suffer when the team plays poorly exactly as the rest of the board. If you think we are not also disappointed in how the team played this year, maybe you need to rethink it. This is all out in the open and costs you nothing. The rules are not that difficult.

 

[4shotB]

Interesting discussion. I have been in management and leadership positions for over half my life now. In large organizations that are exposed to the standard normal distribution (i.e. not handpicked small and elite groups of people) I have found that, for whatever reason, about 10% of people will push back on any form of authority or, in this case, perceived authority.

"You must wear PPE in the smelting and fabrication areas of the plant"...10% (ish) will try to find ways to ignore or circumvent that, even if they understand that PPE reduces the chances of their injury.

"No cellphones or laptops use permitted in class"...again, 10% will waste valuable energy trying to find ways around it.

I used to wonder about the psychology around this. Nowadays, I just agree with CPJ...it s what it is.

For those of you with a decade or more of leading large groups of people, would you agree with my 10% number? I am very curious about what your experience has been. if your experience has been coaching a championship NHL or NBA team or commander of a SEAL team or the like, you may have avoided these problems due to the size and exclusivity of your group as mentioned above. But I say 10% is correct based on my experiences.

 

[Buzzbomb]

10% is about right.
You will never please those folks, so going after the other 90% like you have, is the smart approach. Having been in Business Management most of my life from retail, movie theatres, Treasury Dept., I learned early on that 90% of checks you accept from individuals will clear the bank. It’s the other 10% that have extenuating circumstances and require some form of collection attention.

I praised you guys/gal in a few of those threads, for even allowing us to call for a termination of a coach at GT. Another Tech site I have been a part of for the last 20 years, doesn’t allow calling for such. They actually have more stringent rules.

Thanks again for a thankless job and allowing most of us with a friendly environment to share thoughts. We are all equal in our salaries on The Swarm. Zip. It is what it is! Brothers and Sisters with opinions and a few facts w/ fandom for GT.

 

[takethepoints]

This is not the case.

The mods don't have the time (nor the interest) in proof reading every post for name calling, disrespect, and foul language. This is something we do to help keep the forum alive. We do it because we like the lively discussion. I think all of you are adults who have been around the block more than once. You should be able to make your points in an intelligent manner.

One more thing. All of the mods are long time fans of GT football. We suffer when the team plays poorly exactly as the rest of the board. If you think we are not also disappointed in how the team played this year, maybe you need to rethink it. This is all out in the open and costs you nothing. The rules are not that difficult.

Good. Exactly the answer I wanted. No further complaints from this quarter. And thanks for moderating what I think is the best of all the Tech fan boards.

 

[BuzzStone]

For those of you with a decade or more of leading large groups of people, would you agree with my 10% number? I am very curious about what your experience has been. if your experience has been coaching a championship NHL or NBA team or commander of a SEAL team or the like, you may have avoided these problems due to the size and exclusivity of your group as mentioned above. But I say 10% is correct based on my experiences.

I think that number has grown with the younger members we have at our company. I think the 30+ crowd is at 10% and the younger crowd may be pushing 20%

 

[GTpdm]

Interesting discussion. I have been in management and leadership positions for over half my life now. In large organizations that are exposed to the standard normal distribution (i.e. not handpicked small and elite groups of people) I have found that, for whatever reason, about 10% of people will push back on any form of authority or, in this case, perceived authority.

"You must wear PPE in the smelting and fabrication areas of the plant"...10% (ish) will try to find ways to ignore or circumvent that, even if they understand that PPE reduces the chances of their injury.

"No cellphones or laptops use permitted in class"...again, 10% will waste valuable energy trying to find ways around it.

I used to wonder about the psychology around this. Nowadays, I just agree with CPJ...it s what it is.

For those of you with a decade or more of leading large groups of people, would you agree with my 10% number? I am very curious about what your experience has been. if your experience has been coaching a championship NHL or NBA team or commander of a SEAL team or the like, you may have avoided these problems due to the size and exclusivity of your group as mentioned above. But I say 10% is correct based on my experiences.

As a faculty member at Tech who teaches one of the large core-curriculum courses, I’ve developed what I think of as the Law of Twenty Percent (not 10%): Pick any course activity—homework, recitation, lecture attendance…even something as simple as, “picking up one’s test after it has been graded, to see what you got wrong”. You will always find 20% who don’t bother with that activity, or only do a half-hearted job of it—even when you point to hard statistics at the start of the term, showing that lack of effort in these areas always results in test scores that are 10-15 points lower than everyone else.

I can say, “If you don’t do ‘X’, you are 75% likely to end up with a D or F in the course”…and 20% still won’t bother with ‘X’. They simply don’t want to believe that such statistics apply to them.

For example: back in the old days when we actually returned physical copies of the tests to students, I could spot the people who were going to get Ds and Fs, simply by noting the people who didn’t pick up their first test. That prediction, usually made about 4 weeks into the semester, would typically be 90% accurate.

 

[4shotB]

As a faculty member at Tech who teaches one of the large core-curriculum courses, I’ve developed what I think of as the Law of Twenty Percent (not 10%):

Your 20% is in line with BuzzStone's estimate above. However, you are simply describing the lazy and unmotivated (and yes, any group has those as well). Am I mistaken? I was referring to the people who just can't or won't go along with organizational norms or rules out of spite, defiance, insecurity, low IQ or EQ, etc.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Guys, y'all just talking about the Pareto Principle, also known as the Principle of Factor Sparsity.

 

[slugboy]

There’s also the Peter-eto Principle, where 20% are promoted to the level of their incompetence.

 

[GTpdm]

Guys, y'all just talking about the Pareto Principle, also known as the Principle of Factor Sparsity.

(Looks up “Pareto Principle”)…Damn. And here I thought I was onto something.

Although, to be fair to @4shotB and me, we were talking about evidence at the other end of the bell curve, where apparently 10-20% of the population is responsible for 80% of the negative outcomes. An “anti-PP”, as it were.

Kinda begs the question, though…what does the other 60% of the population accomplish, other than wasting oxygen?

(Heading off the obvious answer: of course, “wasting oxygen” is the forte of dwag fans…)

 

[orientalnc]

(Looks up “Pareto Principle”)…Damn. And here I thought I was onto something.

Although, to be fair to @4shotB and me, we were talking about evidence at the other end of the bell curve, where apparently 10-20% of the population is responsible for 80% of the negative outcomes. An “anti-PP”, as it were.

Kinda begs the question, though…what does the other 60% of the population accomplish, other than wasting oxygen?

(Heading off the obvious answer: of course, “wasting oxygen” is the forte of dwag fans…)

I suspect there is considerable redundancy between your lazy group and 4shotB's defiant group. Although, it's not 100%.

 

[4shotB]

(Looks up “Pareto Principle”)…Damn. And here I thought I was onto something.

Although, to be fair to @4shotB and me, we were talking about evidence at the other end of the bell curve, where apparently 10-20% of the population is responsible for 80% of the negative outcomes. An “anti-PP”, as it were.

Kinda begs the question, though…what does the other 60% of the population accomplish, other than wasting oxygen?

(Heading off the obvious answer: of course, “wasting oxygen” is the forte of dwag fans…)

Love the 'anti-PP" term! The 60% in the middle though is not wasting oxygen (imo). In organizations they are the rank and file, the bread and butter type. Many (most?) people are content being followers rather than leaders and most organizations depend on them. In general, these are the types that only look at their work as a source of income so they can spend time on their passions whether that be family, gardening, coaching Little League, bowling, etc. Essential people at the end of the day.

 

[awbuzz]

I so love the GT Swarm. My "gut" was 10 - 20% of a big group always thinks that rules/norms/etiquette are for others.


Regarding the OP, if folks follow the basic rules, even though they may occasionally step over the line, there usually isn't a problem. But some people, I would swear, are obtuse on purpose.

 

[GTpdm]

I so love the GT Swarm. My "gut" was 10 - 20% of a big group always thinks that rules/norms/etiquette are for others.


Regarding the OP, if folks follow the basic rules, even though they may occasionally step over the line, there usually isn't a problem. But some people, I would swear, are obtuse on purpose.

I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at…

 

[Buzzbomb]

Has anyone noticed that if you have a losing record(including a horrific record)at any time in a major sport on the Flats, a thread will open on this site to fire said Coach?

Not to be a hypocrite, I joined in on Pastner a few years ago.