I don't know, if I was a woman and forced to read the crap you've been laying down in this thread, I might be militant too.
Not sure who you played for. I can tell you across several sports (including football) and multiple levels, military style leadership was pretty infrequent (at least versus the exposure I've had from training and veteran colleagues on the job). The coaches I can think of who I ID'ed that way definitely weren't towards the top of the W/L column. Now that's just my anecdotal experience, but again, it runs pretty counter to what you're saying that football and military always mix. I'm not sure which style is the majority, I'm just saying you take the stretching of your own personal experience a bit too far with your generalizing.
Let me give you an example: Pete Carroll. We may all hate Pete, but the man's had a pretty good career. Do you think he spends a lot of time analogizing football to war?
Again, not a fan of you speaking for all leadership styles. I manage about a hundred people in tech/games. If I used your philosophies, I'd be on the bread line quickly.
Football IS sometimes compared to the military, and I think it's a really poor analogy. Sure, we get worked up about this, but let's be real: the operation of what you're doing and the stakes involved are really, really different. The "leadership" you're on about is necessary and probably also optimal for that military situation. Football isn't the same situation, so don't carbon copy the two. Use multiple approaches to achieve a goal in the most effective and sustainable way possible. THAT is leadership 101, bud. ;)
I'm genuinely curious. Why?
From a particular leadership perspective that seems to lean top-down and authoritarian.
From another leadership perspective: A guy had some (partially) correct criticism about the performance of his coaches, i.e. they didn't do their jobs well. Those coaches could listen to the criticism and learn, or sit him because it's some display of authority? Everyone knows who runs the team, Urban Meyer's "clout" isn't really in question. The gesture you're talking about actually seems a little weak and defensive.
Ha. This a thousand times. :P
Agree really strongly with this, as someone who's involved in a lot of hiring (I run a good part of the operations side for my work - so pretty much from entry level folks all the way up through VP-level). My experience is limited to legal and tech in California, so take all this with a grain of salt.
You're going to carry a larger pay expectation, and with the economic shift towards automation especially on the backend, employers are going to be looking for more skills that tend towards force multiplication rather than 1:1 (mainly tech skills/ability). If you feel like you have those, stop reading and aggressively start looking. Those kinds of skills coupled with your experience in one specific industry is super rare. You'd actually be a diamond in that kind of scenario - hand your resume into recruiters and watch people begin to fight over you.
Otherwise, there are things out there, but agree with the above that it's at risk. Now that's shitty. It's unfair. In some cases it may be illegal (and very hard to prove). That's all true. But it also is the reality. So I'd take the guaranteed income in. How does it work in terms of hours? Two things here: a) what are the posted working hours?; b) what are the "real" working hours (i.e. the time you're still thinking about work or work is de facto preventing you from other activities?). Warehouse feels like it'd generally be less than the ops role you had. If you're getting time back, use that to put into a search in the area. Leverage online resources and recruiters like plenty of folks above have suggested.
You can also take the severance like some folks are suggesting. On one hand, that gives you way more time to dedicate to the search up front. On the other hand, the problem may not be how many hours you can put into the search, but when the right opening comes up. I'm guessing you're not very mobile from the family situation you described, so you're probably tied to the immediate area. That cuts in favor of a patient approach, which is why I'd go with the warehouse job. You can still draw income, spend plenty of time on a job search that will likely "cap" out the offerings in your area at any given time, and you're not under a 29 week time limit to figure out cash flow or feel pressured to take a job that's even worse.
I'm sorry this is happening to you man. I see a lot of people above blaming singular factors, and I get how that's tempting and easy, but it's a little more complex than that. Politicians play a role, but monetary policy set by non-partisan, appointed officials may actually impact your bottom line more. You may blame the business practices of one company, but they may be squeezed in their industry from more cut-throat companies or companies who're simply beating them, and they're taking these measures to stay alive. Ultimately that doesn't matter. You're here, and it's all about what you do next.
If you want help with resume review, happy to get you my personal email and I can give feedback. I've seen a ton of these with my role: good, bad and ugly. Hang in.
Did you not just read the rest of this sub thread?
Am I the only one getting psyched up for the possibility of a 1-2 game with Sparty at home? Holy shit, those tickets may have just become gold.
No excuse. You're right about the rankings objectively, if you started from a clean slate. But the way both polls have done rankings for the last 20 aught years, us staying 1 makes sense.
Team needs to get better. But you also need to come down off the cross. :P
Maybe while they're doing that they can carve off a little time to find a defense...
Defense played great.
Anyone who tells you that our current level of play will get us through the season undefeated and everything is peaches and cream - yeah, they're insane. But at the same time, the sky isn't falling either. This team stocked with talent has a quality coaching staff with at least a good probability of fixing issues on offense AND improving a pretty sturdy defense. They may ultimately not, but the odds don't seem poor. Don't be naive in either direction.
It's just aggression when aggression doesn't make sense.
Props for one of the few threads with a reasonable critique rather than aimless bitching.
Absolutely, but the shit fit that people are throwing right now isn't because they're not "naive". There's entitlement, there's a lack of understanding of how difficult consistently winning at this level can be... there's a lot of bad stuff here.
To be clear, I'm not going after you. Your critiques seem balanced with some basic things like actual data from the game and sanity. I'd rather have everyone be rational, but right now I just think the irrational supporters are a lot less nauseating than the irrational haters.
In fairness, kicking Bert's ass can't be very hard.
Pretty large target to work with.
Most of the people on that committee know more about football than most of the people whinging on these boards right now. If our defense puts up games like this the rest of the season... just relax.
But remembering that requires some tough stuff... like basic use of data and a balanced emotional state. Both are in rather short supply at the moment. :P
You should totally start tweeting them to let them know this vital information.
But should we move it earlier because a few special folks will wind up arrested? I'm just more (((optimistic))) about the judgment of our fans.
Agree, don't downvote. (And UV added for good measure).
That said, noon forever eh? What's it like to be a teetotaler who willingly mortgages my preference for booze against your respect for a decade or so of tradition? Costs and benefits, bucko.
Yes, the British soldiers about to fight the Maori probably thought it was cute too... until they were massacred.
I read a few... beginning to think the value of a PSU degree may be inflated. At least it reminded me of one of the better scenes in Mad Men.
I'm not sure. There was a pretty strong push in Europe to try and open an easier water route to Asia and India. Other ships were going west. I don't think it's a case of he was a necessary component of discovering the Americas. Maybe he jumped it a year or two.
I'm down with recognizing that he was the schmuck who arrived first, but celebrating a day in his honor? Do we really have to do that?
I don't know. Frankly, the behavior is meeting my expectations for a dude with the handle Homey1970.
Someone should try this. Erm, for science, of course.