Adversity
January 25, 2012
It’s been said that adversity causes some people to break and others to break records.
Author Keith McFarland spent seven years studying the performance of 7,000 companies, after which he made this pronouncement: “The top performers had one thing in common. Each went through a period of pronounced difficulty – often serious enough to threaten the firm’s existence.”
McFarland continued in The Breakthrough Company: “Great companies, I discovered, arise not from the absence of difficulty but from its vortex,” its whirly mass.
The key during tough times, according to McFarland, is not to focus on survival, but instead to ask fundamental questions, to face facts that might have gone overlooked in more prosperous times, and to identify and integrate the new knowledge and insights that adversity can bring.
Schools and school sports, today in the vortex of adversity, may actually do more than merely survive our present difficulties if we too examine obstacles and opportunities previously overlooked, and then make positive use of the lessons that sometimes only adversity can bring.
A Scottish author of the 19th century with the optimistic name Samuel Smiles wrote: “The very greatest things – great thoughts, discoveries, inventions – have usually been nurtured in hardship, often pondered over in sorrow, and at length established with difficulty.”
Seeding Questions
April 6, 2015
The more I hear people speak with absolute certainty that seeding MHSAA tournaments would be a good thing for more sports to implement, the less I’m certain that adequate wisdom accompanies those words. And I’m particularly concerned with the condescending attitude of the advocates toward those who question if seeding is practical or fair for MHSAA tournaments.
Before seeding is adopted for additional MHSAA tournaments (and it appears ice hockey is on the fastest track), there are many practical questions to address for each sport, including who decides, how they decide and when they decide. Seeding in school sports is a much more difficult task than it is at higher levels where there are many fewer teams operating in much less diverse settings.
Any successful proposal for seeding in school sports must be able to give an informed “No” to these questions:
- Will the plan cause the “rich to get richer,” the successful to be even more successful?
- Will the plan add fuel to the public vs. nonpublic school discord?
- Will the plan create additional travel expenses for schools and loss of classroom instructional time for students?
Furthermore, any successful seeding plan must also provide an informed “Yes” to these questions:
- Will the plan promote the tournament among schools, media and the public?
- Will the plan increase tournament attendance?
And it is of most importance that every advocate of seeding acknowledge that opponents of seeding pose the right questions when they ask:
- Is it fair and is it right to ease the tournament trail for teams based on their regular season performance?
- Is a brand new start in the postseason bad, and if so, by what educational criteria?
When people boast that “the seeds held” in the NCAA basketball tournament or in our own MHSAA Tennis Tournament, we have to admit that this is exactly what ought to have happened when we gave the top seeds the easiest road to the trophy.
It is not wrong to question if that’s the right thing to do.