It's that time of year again. My mind is busy with thoughts of drills, plays and intensity. From now until March I'm consumed with thoughts of my middle school basketball team.

I lost some talented and amazing girls this year, but my five 7th graders from the prior year somehow transformed into 8th graders at tryouts. They are real leaders on the team, but they're going to need a lot of patience as the others catch up. I think they're in a rush and forgot some of the basics. :)

Fifteen girls and five practices - there is never enough time before the annual Thanksgiving Day tournament. A brief defensive overview, a few skeleton motion offense drills and one out of bounce play will have to be enough! It is still early, but I hope to see more intensity in my girls. Their motivation shouldn't always be the coach, but their own desire to play the game.

My fear this year is that I will compare this group of girls to ones from last year. I hear the second year is tough that way or maybe every year is? It is difficult to start from scratch knowing that most of the learning from last year is lost and I will have to start again. With this new year I pray for a newfound patience, determination and enthusiasm.

Fox and Objectional Content

The Parents Television Council studied the 6 major broadcast networks for a 2 week period in 2006/2007 television season. The members were looking for objectional content, tallying instances of violence, sex and profanity. On average, these instances occurred once every 4.8 minutes. The Fox network (News Corp) was the worst offender with 20.78 instances per hour.

It seems strange that while Fox appears to be unapologetic for objectional content that they were overbearing at the Emmy's. Sally Field and Ray Ramono's speaches were censored along with Katherine Heigl's response when she won her Emmy. The network was worried about the words "sh-t" and GD then. Would it surprise you to know they also air the most profane show out of the 6 major broadcast networks?

The network consistently has the highest Thursday night metered market average - the same night at the most profane show (according to the Parents Television Council) is on - My Name is Earl. I happen to like the show, but I found all of this to be quite strange. There are harsher standards for various programming and the whole thing seems to be quite contradictory.

Alumni Game

Last weekend I participated in my Alumni soccer game at my old undergrad. I was excited and surprised to see that many of my former teammates were able to make it. It felt like old times for all the right reasons. The cleats may have been new, but the attitudes were not.

Although the current team has some speed and weeks of training on their side, the Alumni controlled most of the play to win 5-2. The current team had some things to learn.

The fact we have a former All-American on our side probably didn't help or the fact that most of the Alumni players are athletic twenty-some year olds, but our touch was off at first and our speed wasn't extraordinary. Some say the older you get, the smarter you play and I think that fact was part of the reason. Maybe it was because it was the last day of try-outs for the current players and nerves, soreness and selfishness took over. It could have been our height advantage or our experience in playing in national tournaments.

In fact, there were probably a million factors at play, but what I heard after the win from one of my teammates summed it up: “That felt good.”

“Desire is the most important factor in the success of any athlete.” - William Shoemaker

Taxes: Food for Thought

In my Public Finance class tonight we focused on the Income Tax (whether it should be replaced) and the Capital Gains Tax (whether it should be eliminated). Realistically we know each one will not be eliminated, if anything only renamed...but one could hope.

Some of the population would like to replace the income tax with a variation of the flat or fair tax, but the grass is always greener on the other side. Each type has their own issues and I'm positive neither would improve the current tax situation. The new reform would have to be revenue neutral.

The capital gains tax can be viewed as a tax on economic growth or a tax to control the conspiracy among corporate and political goliaths. Many agreed that taxing the wealthy would probably solve most of our problems, especially since most of the asset and stock holders are the weathly (which isn't true as the middle class would probably hurt the most), so why not just increase it? I'm not sold on the idea that I would increase the CGT - or rather increase it permanently.

After the debate, the professor gave us food for thought instead. He made three excellent points (whether you agree or disagree, they will make you think):

1. There are two schools of thought he said: One either looks at the rich and wishes he/she could be wealthy like that one day; or looks at the rich and hopes they are like me one day. To keep taxing the wealthy would stagnate most of the economy while the rest would find ways to avoid paying the taxes and would defeat the purpose anyways. When the wealthy succeed (Bill Gates - Microsoft - computer boom of the 90s or the decline of the boating economy after the boat tax supposedly imposed just on the rich), the economy succeeds, so why insist on taxing them to the extremes?
   
2. We can all agree on one subject about taxes and that is the Laffer Curve. One of the simplest concepts in economics. When a person pays 0% taxes, they are not earning income. When a person pays 100% in taxes, they will substitute work for leisure and will again not be employed (at least not legally). Many will agree there is an optimal level of taxes for the economy that will (keeping all other things equal, of course - this is economics after all) by reducing its taxes will increase its revenue.
3. Taxes are imposed for two reasons: income and control (discourage/encourage behaviors).
   

Traditional Female Roles

Over the weekend, I read a book entitled: Type Talk: The 16 Personality Types That Determine How We Live, Love and Work by Otto Kroeger & Janet M. Thuesen. I shared Chapter 2: "What's Your Type?" with my family. Two members matched their Personality Type description perfectly and were amazed with the insightful profile that defined them. The others fall so far in between the eight categories that multiple types defined bits and pieces of who they are.

Personally, I was disappointed - not because I fall in between categories, but because of how the authors viewed gender roles. Of the eight personality types that are Thinkers, all 8 are more acceptable as a males in society. Females are viewed as "out of step with the mainstream" and are "not readily associated with women in our society." My favorite was for the category dubbed "Life's Natural Leaders":
"Gender issues are especially significant for ENTJ females. As a type, their arrogant, confrontational manner and need for control can appear to be quite 'unwomanly' to others. Efforts by parents and others to mold them into more traditional female images are usually met with rebellion. Other women usually resent the arrogance of ENTJ females and can feel 'talked down to.' As a result, an ENTJ female may unwittingly find herself to be a loner, something particularly difficult for Extraverts."
Those words are harsh for the women that fall particularly into that category. As I mentioned my personality overlaps multiple types, but I happen to be an ET - Extraverted Thinker - that is typically a male personality.

Let me re-state: I'm not disappointed with the authors' blunt viewpoint; but rather, I'm disappointed that I fall into the typically male personality category. Why is it that males dominate the Thinker category? Is it a natural-way-of-life explanation? Or are females taught to expend their energy other ways? Could it be that a female hasn't been elected president, because there are more men in the leader category? Or is it a gender issue that hasn't been resolved?

Bill Brandt

“We look at a thing and believe we have seen it. And yet what we see is often only what our past experiences tell us should be seen, or what our desires want to see. Very rarely are we able to free our minds of thoughts and emotions and just see for the simple pleasure of seeing. And so log as we fail to do this, so long will the essence of things be hidden from us.”

"I consider it essential that the photographer should do his own printing and enlarging. The final effect of the finished print depends so much on these operations, and only the photographer himself knows the effect he wants."

Soccer

1. Work ethic

• No explanation necessary.
  

2. Desire

• Like it, love it, want some more of it.
  

3. Common Sense

• There are some concepts and skills that cannot be taught, but stem from common sense, as all areas of life.
  

4. Geometry

• It is all about the angles for passing, on defense and off the ball movement. Without understanding the basic concepts visually, the game will be played sloppily.
  

5. Team synergy

• There should be fluid motion across the field. Defense to forwards should move across the field as one team. Opening up on offense and condensing on defense.

6. Endurance

• Long runs as well as ladders will help on the field. Training varies from outdoor to indoor seasons.

7. Anticipation

• Anticipate runs, a ball played forward or a 50-50 ball.

8. Be prepared

• This is a coachless game. There are no timeouts or a novel-long play book to memorize. It is 45 minutes of non-stop play.

9. Persistance

• One goal could make or break you. Don't let this slow your momentum.