Soon we'll be watching the ball drop in Times Square and 2011 will be no more. At this stage of life, 365 days goes by quickly and I wouldn't be doing the last day of the year justice if I didn't take time to reflect on what has transpired over the past 12 months.
It goes without saying, but I'm going to say it anyways, I'm very blessed and fortunate to be in the position I am as a father, husband, brother, son, friend, business owner, coach, etc. So many wonderful things have happened this year. I've celebrated life more this year than ever before. There have been birthdays, births (11/11/11 - 11:11) and rebirths (1 Cor 5:17) all around.
I've experienced minor new things that have become a big part of my life, too, namely Apple, as in the iPad and iPhone. Yep, they're everything they're cracked up to be, even if the iPad is used mostly to watch "Gummi Bear Song." Netflix: another great thing. DVR - we've had it for six years, but just recently joined the crowd to record series. Why did I wait so long? Mini-Vans...recliners...nap time..free time...holy crap! I'm old!
Life has definitely been moving in fast forward all around me. I've done my best to take it all in and appreciate what is right in front of me. I remember I used to look forward to the next adventure or the next big thing, but now it seems like I'm frantically searching for the "pause" button as life happens. Unfortunately, we can't DVR the daily routine and re-live it or re-watch it whenever we want.
Of course, there are great things to look forward to in 2012, however, I don't want to get ahead of myself and miss out on the good stuff happening today. Heck, the boys are asleep right now and when they wake up in a few minutes, I'm sure I'll have yet another life changing experience. I love that. Why fast forward to tomorrow when I can submerse myself in today? I guess that's why I spent the afternoon at my sister's house and will be enjoying a movie and Whirly Pop tonight with Liz.
December 31, 2011 is what 2011 was all about for me (minus all of the politics, of course) - quality family time. Remembering 2011 is easy. All I have to do is look at my living room.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Thursday, December 29, 2011
The Wife
I had a short conversation with my brother yesterday about people in Northwest Wisconsin calling their wife "The Wife" or "The Old Lady" or any other nomenclature besides their actual name. Then today one of my favorite authors wrote about calling your wife "the bride" and he shared similar discontent with the idea.
Other terms I hear too often: the ball and chain, the old hag, the boss, etc.
It's most likely universal in thought, however, the titles used to label one's wife seem to vary across regions. Whenever someone asks me what "the wife" does or where she is, my skin crawls. They could rephrase by saying, "what does your wife do?" instead of "what does the wife do?" and it would make all the difference. Since it irritates me so much, I quickly snap back and say, "her name is Liz." They usually look at me confused, but yes, she does have a name. If you don't know her name, that's fine, but do not call her the anything.
The reason this bothers me so much is because I feel like it's a subconscious attempt to dehumanize the most important human being in my life: Liz. She's not a convenient label or below any man. She's an equal and she's unique and distinctive. Her name represents her. A convenient title assumes she's like "everyone" else or that all women or all wives are the same. They're not. As a result of my feeling this way, I take special notice to how other men treat and talk to their wife. I get a horrible feeling that this type of creating a label for their wife (or wives in general) is a sneaky way to disrespect them. I'm sure most people won't admit to that, though.
Other terms I hear too often: the ball and chain, the old hag, the boss, etc.
It's most likely universal in thought, however, the titles used to label one's wife seem to vary across regions. Whenever someone asks me what "the wife" does or where she is, my skin crawls. They could rephrase by saying, "what does your wife do?" instead of "what does the wife do?" and it would make all the difference. Since it irritates me so much, I quickly snap back and say, "her name is Liz." They usually look at me confused, but yes, she does have a name. If you don't know her name, that's fine, but do not call her the anything.
The reason this bothers me so much is because I feel like it's a subconscious attempt to dehumanize the most important human being in my life: Liz. She's not a convenient label or below any man. She's an equal and she's unique and distinctive. Her name represents her. A convenient title assumes she's like "everyone" else or that all women or all wives are the same. They're not. As a result of my feeling this way, I take special notice to how other men treat and talk to their wife. I get a horrible feeling that this type of creating a label for their wife (or wives in general) is a sneaky way to disrespect them. I'm sure most people won't admit to that, though.
Monday, December 26, 2011
Be good for goodness sake
This has been an interesting holiday season for me. Christmas came and went by very quickly. It seemed like yesterday we were trying to figure out what to eat for Thanksgiving dinner, and voila! Christmas was here and then gone.
Aside from how quickly the joyous time of year passed, my reflection of the glorious day is less than admirable. I was a victim to the commercialization of Christmas, and not by choice. Since I have children, there was pressure on all sides to make this holiday about one thing: Santa.
Is Santa coming to your house? What did you ask Santa to bring you for Christmas? Are you being good...for Santa?
We place very little emphasis on Santa in our home. There are many reasons for this parenting decision. I'm not the Grinch and I'm not trying to squelch the imagination of my children. Instead, we have intentionally decided to simply make Santa a part of Christmas - a small part, mind you - and not the central figure and/or focus. Somehow, our good intentions were thwarted by others insisting that Santa IS Christmas.
Together, Liz and I had been teaching our oldest son how to approach Christmas with a healthy perspective, however, he went to bed on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day night with very little appreciation for what he had received and he wasn't satisfied. It was an ugly side of him that we were both appalled by. It was almost like he had been told by everyone that he was entitled to an abundance of gifts because everyone told him he was. He was a brat. And I blame Santa.
We had been building up "Jesus' Birthday" for weeks and we were really excited to celebrate it with Him. We had the party, but unfortunately, it turned out that Jesus wasn't even invited. Santa was, though, and he took Jesus' seat. Not only was Jesus kicked out, but many of his unique qualities were bestowed upon the man with the white beard - figuratively and literally - omnipotent, omnipresent, all-knowing, etc. When Jesus was born over 2,000 years ago, there was no room for him. It seems like things haven't changed.
Santa is watching you. You better be good or Santa won't come.
What ever happened to be good for goodness sake? That's what the Santa anthem says. That message wasn't communicated to my kids. They were told to be good or Santa wouldn't come. It was a bribe. In the end, Santa didn't come anyways. Isaiah didn't want him to. As he was falling asleep, he asked for Mommy and Daddy to come into his room. He insisted that we call Santa and tell him not to come because he was afraid of the idea of someone coming into our house while he was sleeping. I can't blame him. I don't want him around, either.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
What's the deal with medals and trophies?
I've often heard parents and young athletes talk about the size of the medal or trophy at a tournament as a measuring stick for the quality of the event. I'm adamantly opposed to large trophies and gaudy rewards for many reasons that are not the topic of this post. Nonetheless, these awards seem to be a driving force in the lives of many young athletes (and parents). Does it really matter how the kid gets the medal or trophy?
There are a lot of answers to this straight forward question. Many would say, "of course it matters, they need to earn it." Others claim participation is worth something and it's the carrot that gets them away from video games and promotes healthy competition and activity. Still, some believe that the trophy, and the size, is the be-all, end-all to the experience.
Dan Gable told me that he believes kids should receive bananas at tournaments because after one week, the banana gets old and it's time to get a new one. No one wants a rotten banana on their mantel. By the way, I've seen Gable's mantle and there are no bananas. There is an Olympic Gold Medal, though.
The reason I'm bringing up this subject is because I saw something in my 3-year old son that I wasn't aware of as a critic of the overabundance of medals and trophies. It's nothing that is going to force others to say, "see, I told you so, when your own have kids..." (I hear that too often). It actually solidifies my conviction on this subject. Isaiah was digging around at Victory and found a gold medal at the bottom of a drawer. It was left over from an event that I held four years ago. It didn't matter to him. He loved this "new" gold medal. He wore it the entire day and even took his afternoon nap with it. I hear parents and see forum posts explain the importance of these awards by describing how their kid sleeps with his/her trophy after an event because it means so much to him. And it does.
Reality check: why not just buy your son or daughter a medal or trophy? My son got to enjoy his gold medal and then, after a while, the newness wore off and now it's sitting on the steps. Isn't this the final destination for all trophies and medals? Eventually they get old and less exciting. Sure, some of them have a deeper meaning and great value (like Gable's Olympic gold medal), but they get old just like bananas. Is the trophy-looking carrot really what's best for children. Must they compete in events to "earn" or receive a medal?
I had no shame in letting my son parade around the house with his medal even though he didn't earn it. I'm glad I have this renewed perspective. I actually don't have to take my kids to a youth wrestling tournament, surrounded by chaos and confusion, for him to have this experience. It can be this simple. Kids crave the trophy, but many of them aren't interested in the competition they must endure before receiving it. It's a tricky marketing scheme to get them in the door to feed the youth sports system. The parents don't need convincing, do they? But the children do. They'll participate just for the medal or trophy. Event organizers are well aware of this and promote it.
So, what's the deal with medals and trophies? Are they essential to long term development? When Target or ShopKo start carrying gold medals, it could be the end of youth tournaments. I haven't decided if that would be a good or bad thing.
There are a lot of answers to this straight forward question. Many would say, "of course it matters, they need to earn it." Others claim participation is worth something and it's the carrot that gets them away from video games and promotes healthy competition and activity. Still, some believe that the trophy, and the size, is the be-all, end-all to the experience.
Dan Gable told me that he believes kids should receive bananas at tournaments because after one week, the banana gets old and it's time to get a new one. No one wants a rotten banana on their mantel. By the way, I've seen Gable's mantle and there are no bananas. There is an Olympic Gold Medal, though.
The reason I'm bringing up this subject is because I saw something in my 3-year old son that I wasn't aware of as a critic of the overabundance of medals and trophies. It's nothing that is going to force others to say, "see, I told you so, when your own have kids..." (I hear that too often). It actually solidifies my conviction on this subject. Isaiah was digging around at Victory and found a gold medal at the bottom of a drawer. It was left over from an event that I held four years ago. It didn't matter to him. He loved this "new" gold medal. He wore it the entire day and even took his afternoon nap with it. I hear parents and see forum posts explain the importance of these awards by describing how their kid sleeps with his/her trophy after an event because it means so much to him. And it does.
Reality check: why not just buy your son or daughter a medal or trophy? My son got to enjoy his gold medal and then, after a while, the newness wore off and now it's sitting on the steps. Isn't this the final destination for all trophies and medals? Eventually they get old and less exciting. Sure, some of them have a deeper meaning and great value (like Gable's Olympic gold medal), but they get old just like bananas. Is the trophy-looking carrot really what's best for children. Must they compete in events to "earn" or receive a medal?
I had no shame in letting my son parade around the house with his medal even though he didn't earn it. I'm glad I have this renewed perspective. I actually don't have to take my kids to a youth wrestling tournament, surrounded by chaos and confusion, for him to have this experience. It can be this simple. Kids crave the trophy, but many of them aren't interested in the competition they must endure before receiving it. It's a tricky marketing scheme to get them in the door to feed the youth sports system. The parents don't need convincing, do they? But the children do. They'll participate just for the medal or trophy. Event organizers are well aware of this and promote it.
So, what's the deal with medals and trophies? Are they essential to long term development? When Target or ShopKo start carrying gold medals, it could be the end of youth tournaments. I haven't decided if that would be a good or bad thing.
Monday, December 12, 2011
De-training
One of the largest differences in youth sports today compared to ten years ago or longer is the opportunity to train. There are options for more practice, greater intensity, specialization, advance techniques from highly educated and experienced coaches, awareness and understanding of scientific approaches to athletics and much more. When used correctly, these opportunities can be extremely beneficial. One particular area in the advanced training of athletes that doesn't receive enough attention is the recovery phrase, but more particularly, the "de-training" period.
Rest periods are essential to successful training cycles. One doesn't over-train as much as under recover. Recovery has many layers and is often times the secret weapon to success in a culture that pushes to the extremes. Preparing the body, mind and soul for the recovery phase is a key to getting the most out of it.
De-training is the two or three day time frame (or more) that immediately follows a large competition or the conclusion of a peak performance plan. It takes into account the heavy workload and intensity of a competition and helps you prepare for the recovery phase. It includes a variety of de-programming activities that assure the athlete adequately recovers.
Athletes can come out of a recovery phase without experiencing any kind of recovery. When dealing with the Total Athlete, all three facets must be adequately recharged (body, mind and soul). American athletes complete a cycle or finish a large competition and immediately take time off or "rest." Most of the time, their break has very little foresight. A typical scenario is an athlete competes on Saturday and then stays up late, ingests what has been forbidden for a period of time, sleeps in and catches up on the social activities that were missed while preparing. It makes sense and seems natural because the hard work is done. There is validity to this, however, it's not always the most productive avenue for recovery. Simply because the "hard" work is done doesn't give the athlete a license to ignore the "easy" work. Many of those things that were missed during the hard work can still be enjoyed, but proper preparation should be utilized here, too.
A lot of attention is placed on getting the athlete to peak while very little is placed on getting the most out of the recovery phase. Getting the most from each rest period or recovery phase will enable the next peak to be higher.
Rest periods are essential to successful training cycles. One doesn't over-train as much as under recover. Recovery has many layers and is often times the secret weapon to success in a culture that pushes to the extremes. Preparing the body, mind and soul for the recovery phase is a key to getting the most out of it.
De-training is the two or three day time frame (or more) that immediately follows a large competition or the conclusion of a peak performance plan. It takes into account the heavy workload and intensity of a competition and helps you prepare for the recovery phase. It includes a variety of de-programming activities that assure the athlete adequately recovers.
Athletes can come out of a recovery phase without experiencing any kind of recovery. When dealing with the Total Athlete, all three facets must be adequately recharged (body, mind and soul). American athletes complete a cycle or finish a large competition and immediately take time off or "rest." Most of the time, their break has very little foresight. A typical scenario is an athlete competes on Saturday and then stays up late, ingests what has been forbidden for a period of time, sleeps in and catches up on the social activities that were missed while preparing. It makes sense and seems natural because the hard work is done. There is validity to this, however, it's not always the most productive avenue for recovery. Simply because the "hard" work is done doesn't give the athlete a license to ignore the "easy" work. Many of those things that were missed during the hard work can still be enjoyed, but proper preparation should be utilized here, too.
A lot of attention is placed on getting the athlete to peak while very little is placed on getting the most out of the recovery phase. Getting the most from each rest period or recovery phase will enable the next peak to be higher.
Monday, December 5, 2011
The truth about Tebow
I heard an interesting observation of Tim Tebow the week leading into his first start this year. The analysts said, "Tim Tebow is everything his fans say he is and everything his critics say he is." It was an interesting comment at the time. One to which I agreed with. However, I think it's time his critics are confronted. The critique of those naysayers revolved around the idea that he couldn't win in the NFL as a starting quarterback. They're wrong.
As a starting quarterback in the NFL this season, Tebow is 6-1 and has successfully brought an awful team out of the cellar into first place in their division. Now, they're on the verge of making the playoffs. Still, the pundits are claiming he can't play, he can't throw, he can't read defenses, he doesn't know how to play the position, and his defense is carrying the team. These are all things people are saying in an attempt to continually cut Tebow down. I watched the Broncos against the Packers in week 4 and then yesterday against the Vikings. News flash: their defense is not very good. I also witnessed, with my own eyes, Tebow hit a few wide open receivers down field and win a football game with his arm. I didn't read about it, I saw it. It was in the same game that the opposing quarterback - who also happens to be a first year starter drafted in the first round - missed some very important passes and threw a bone headed interception in the closing minutes of the game, two things Tebow has not done as a starter. Yet, he gets raked over the coals and they spare the Vikings starter who "had a record day" and is 1-5 as a starter.
This week tells it all. He improves to 6-1, the Vikings future star drops to 1-5. He has a game winning drive after his opponent throws a game deciding interception and Tebow gets criticized. His defense gave up 32 points this week. Why doesn't he get a few kudos for this victory? The truth is, people don't like Tebow because he's a Christian. That's it.
Jake Plummer recently made a comment about how he wished Tebow would just quit talking about his faith in Jesus Christ. This argument is really starting to bother me. I follow football very closely and I have yet to hear Tebow talk about Jesus when the topic is football. Others talk about it around him and to him, but he's a football player. His post game interviews are about football, not Jesus. Plummer and the others are simply making this stuff up. Of course, he prays or points to the sky after a touchdown, but so does Greg Jennings and probably 100 other players, including a handful of quarterbacks. He's a Christian and everyone knows it, but he's not proclaiming it nearly as much as the media says he is.
Before this week, I thought a lot of the negative remarks and criticism were because Tebow is unconventional and unorthodox. He's not traditional and analysts are more comfortable with things they've already seen and things they can predict. They haven't seen the likes of Tebow and he's difficult to predict. That's an awful combination for journalists who are trying predetermine the winner. After this week, however, I now understand it no longer has anything to do with football. In fact, I'm not sure if it ever did.
He's an easy target for these vultures because no matter how much ridicule there is about him, he takes it and continues to play football. He doesn't fight back, so their drivel has no recourse. This must drive Boomer Esiason and others absolutely crazy. It's like he completely ignores them and goes out and proves them wrong. He continues to win in spite of their assurance that he won't. For them, it would be much easier if he lashed back, told them to shut up or tried to stick up for himself, but he doesn't, and they despise him even more because he continues to prove that he's better than them. He wants to play football, and he is.
I don't think Tim Tebow should win the NFL MVP and I think he has a lot of things that he needs to work on as a quarterback. He would agree, and has stated that he needs to improve. However, he's winning football games and has led a team from worst to first in a matter of weeks. Any argument that says he's not a good NFL quarterback is outlandishly ignorant, naive and ridiculous. Mechanically and technically, he's not Joe Montana. No one claims he is. In Montana's second season in the NFL, by the way, he was 2-5 as a starter with 15 touchdown and 9 interceptions. Peyton Manning was 3-13 in his first year as a starter and had more interceptions than touchdowns (26-28). John Elway, his boss, was 4-6 and threw twice as many interceptions as touchdowns (7-14). Come on, people, the kid can play. He is 6-1 and has a 10-1 touchdown-to-interception ratio.
If you don't like Tebow because he's a positive role model (for kids and adults), is a humanitarian, doesn't get in trouble, demonstrates great sportsmanship, works hard, etc., then come out and lead your critique with those statements. Otherwise, hold the rest of the NFL's young quarterbacks to the same standard (e.g. Christian Ponder, Tyler Palko, Blaine Gabbert, Curtis Painter, Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy, etc.) and don't tell me how the NFL needs better people representing the sport than the Ben Roethlisbergers or Ndamakung Suhs who make poor decisions. The truth is, Tebow wins. The truth is, he's a great man. The truth is, people don't like him because of it. And they don't like him because he's a Christian.
As a starting quarterback in the NFL this season, Tebow is 6-1 and has successfully brought an awful team out of the cellar into first place in their division. Now, they're on the verge of making the playoffs. Still, the pundits are claiming he can't play, he can't throw, he can't read defenses, he doesn't know how to play the position, and his defense is carrying the team. These are all things people are saying in an attempt to continually cut Tebow down. I watched the Broncos against the Packers in week 4 and then yesterday against the Vikings. News flash: their defense is not very good. I also witnessed, with my own eyes, Tebow hit a few wide open receivers down field and win a football game with his arm. I didn't read about it, I saw it. It was in the same game that the opposing quarterback - who also happens to be a first year starter drafted in the first round - missed some very important passes and threw a bone headed interception in the closing minutes of the game, two things Tebow has not done as a starter. Yet, he gets raked over the coals and they spare the Vikings starter who "had a record day" and is 1-5 as a starter.
This week tells it all. He improves to 6-1, the Vikings future star drops to 1-5. He has a game winning drive after his opponent throws a game deciding interception and Tebow gets criticized. His defense gave up 32 points this week. Why doesn't he get a few kudos for this victory? The truth is, people don't like Tebow because he's a Christian. That's it.
Jake Plummer recently made a comment about how he wished Tebow would just quit talking about his faith in Jesus Christ. This argument is really starting to bother me. I follow football very closely and I have yet to hear Tebow talk about Jesus when the topic is football. Others talk about it around him and to him, but he's a football player. His post game interviews are about football, not Jesus. Plummer and the others are simply making this stuff up. Of course, he prays or points to the sky after a touchdown, but so does Greg Jennings and probably 100 other players, including a handful of quarterbacks. He's a Christian and everyone knows it, but he's not proclaiming it nearly as much as the media says he is.
Before this week, I thought a lot of the negative remarks and criticism were because Tebow is unconventional and unorthodox. He's not traditional and analysts are more comfortable with things they've already seen and things they can predict. They haven't seen the likes of Tebow and he's difficult to predict. That's an awful combination for journalists who are trying predetermine the winner. After this week, however, I now understand it no longer has anything to do with football. In fact, I'm not sure if it ever did.
He's an easy target for these vultures because no matter how much ridicule there is about him, he takes it and continues to play football. He doesn't fight back, so their drivel has no recourse. This must drive Boomer Esiason and others absolutely crazy. It's like he completely ignores them and goes out and proves them wrong. He continues to win in spite of their assurance that he won't. For them, it would be much easier if he lashed back, told them to shut up or tried to stick up for himself, but he doesn't, and they despise him even more because he continues to prove that he's better than them. He wants to play football, and he is.
I don't think Tim Tebow should win the NFL MVP and I think he has a lot of things that he needs to work on as a quarterback. He would agree, and has stated that he needs to improve. However, he's winning football games and has led a team from worst to first in a matter of weeks. Any argument that says he's not a good NFL quarterback is outlandishly ignorant, naive and ridiculous. Mechanically and technically, he's not Joe Montana. No one claims he is. In Montana's second season in the NFL, by the way, he was 2-5 as a starter with 15 touchdown and 9 interceptions. Peyton Manning was 3-13 in his first year as a starter and had more interceptions than touchdowns (26-28). John Elway, his boss, was 4-6 and threw twice as many interceptions as touchdowns (7-14). Come on, people, the kid can play. He is 6-1 and has a 10-1 touchdown-to-interception ratio.
If you don't like Tebow because he's a positive role model (for kids and adults), is a humanitarian, doesn't get in trouble, demonstrates great sportsmanship, works hard, etc., then come out and lead your critique with those statements. Otherwise, hold the rest of the NFL's young quarterbacks to the same standard (e.g. Christian Ponder, Tyler Palko, Blaine Gabbert, Curtis Painter, Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy, etc.) and don't tell me how the NFL needs better people representing the sport than the Ben Roethlisbergers or Ndamakung Suhs who make poor decisions. The truth is, Tebow wins. The truth is, he's a great man. The truth is, people don't like him because of it. And they don't like him because he's a Christian.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
