Leadership thoughts

I don't know how many of you watched the UNC vs. NC State game the other night (I think it was Wednesday night), but I found the difference between the first half of the game and the second half of the game amazing. NC State, which was pretty much overall regarded as the underdog and least likely to win, was staying head to head with UNC, but during the half-time the NC State coach collapsed and was taken to the hospital (no sweat, he's fine now). The assistant coach had to finish coaching the game. The craziest part was that State then proceeded to lose by around 20 points. What was the difference? I'd say leadership. Of course there are a million variables, including an amazing coach for UNC, who might have just figured out how to take out NC State.

But the most significant difference I saw was leadership and motivation. First point I want to make is that if the NC State team had no head coach their performance would have remained steady, because there would not have been a massive shift in leadership to upset the team's equilibrium. But the downside of that is that the team would not have been able to perform to the maximum of their potential without a coach. So a simple understanding would be that with leadership they were able to far exceed their capabilities without it, but when the leadership was removed, their performance dropped below where it would have been had they been playing without a leader/coach all along.

Secondly, motivation. A good leader can motivate his team. I'm not saying anything bad about the assistant coach. The poor guy had to step in on one of the toughest, fired up games of the year and try to inspire a team who had just seen their coach collapse. But the real teller was the way the team played the second half, like a ship with no sails. They lost all control of the game, they were only responding. A good leader motivates, an incredible leader empowers his people so that at some point they don't need him anymore - they can go and do without him because he has given them what they need and they no longer depend on him. College athletes aren't necessarily expected to quite operate at this level, but the evidences of great leadership at the college level emerge further down the path of a college athlete's life.

I know the lack of a head coach is not the sole reason NC State lost the game, but I think it was a major contributing factor. Something to be noted for it's effects.

Different way to say it...

"I'm not complaining, I'm just expressing my negative opinion!"

Attention span

I was thinking yesterday (since my job is pretty brainless, I do pretty much nothing else but think through many different random things while I work). One thought that popped out was that our modern attention span may have shortened more dramatically than to the supposed 22 minutes most claim it to have shrunk to. They make this claim because of the numerous half hour shows which fill up the channels on TV. These shows, minus the commercials, run on average around 22 minutes. This phenomenon has made many public speakers rethink their presentations so that they do not run past the 22 minute mark, because supposedly the public begins to quickly lose interest after that.

I fear this may be a wrong analysis. I think the modern attention span has shrunk to around 5-7 minute segments. I use the term "segments" because most people can pay attention much longer than 5-7 minutes, but that's how often they are used to having "breaks" in their attention paying, due to commercials. Anything requiring attention longer than 5-7 minutes begins to seem long-winded unless it is highly stimulating.

Though not universally true, I think this phenomenon is sad. A dependence upon stimulation for cognizant focus and interaction will ultimately undercut an individual's capacity to focus upon something and retain information gained therein.

Yeah, completely random...but sadly true.