Texsox

Should we just pin this?

I feel stupid offering any advice because clearly I am struggling to see the IRL person behind your well written, well analysed posts. With the well traveled and varied experiences of the posters here it seems like we could develop a short list of careers that match your talents. Help us out. What would the ideal position look like? For starters I'm thinking that depth, not breadth is your strength. Working on one or two big research, long term, type projects would be better than juggling a dozen tasks. Less face to face interactions and more written communications with colleagues would be advantageous. What else would help? One of my first thoughts is proofreading books.

While this is not really an issue in my sport, it is in other high school sports. Concussions are especially concerning. We have very strict procedures when our athletes are hurt. Yes, even in golf I've been through that process with a player who got hurt.

No, I don't think he's ready. The by product of that is an extra season at a higher performing level. A win for the organization. If he was in most organizations there wouldn't even be a discussion about bringing him up. Most of your argument centers around he's the best in the organization at his position. His readiness, or lack of readiness, should not have anything to do with the players above him. That places the current needs of the team above his development. In the minors his development is the top priority. If that means a dip in production while he experiments, that's ok. Once he starts playing at the MLB level the team winning becomes #1. You want to place the team above the player. With this team, I don't see the need. Keep his development number one.

Many can't fail prospects have failed. I'm going to be optimistic and believe he's going to have a great career. Financially he will eventually become a free agent and sign a huge ass contract with someone else and be set for life. So do I want him playing a season now on a sub .500 team or later on a team that might be good? It seems like such an easy answer I'm surprised it's even being debated.

The revenue sports are the front door displays to the university. It gets the university on a high school kid's radar. It's bragging rights and campus culture. They fund opportunities for the non revenue sports and activities like band. Someone already mentioned the money that visitors and fans contribute. Some athletes use a college as a stepping stone for a career as a pro athlete, most do not. They receive a degree and go on to careers.

I'm a little surprised this.

The ICW through North Carolina has been amazing. I'm loving life on a boat.

I finally used public trans for a game and I may never drive to a game again.

I've always thought there was a good reason each team drafts about 100 players a year. I rarely get excited about prospects. The last time was probably 20 years ago when we had five sure fire Cy Young prospects that all flamed out.

Ozzie? I have never seen a manager, in any sport, quit on his team worse than Ozzie. He managed in a way so that he would be fired and allowed to take a position with a different team. That should never be forgiven. He burned the bridge.

How to be popular with the voters 2019 edition. Be on national TV regularly. Be on ESPN nightly Be a name that has already played in multiple ASG Have glitzy 20th century stats. Be a player that serious fans will vote for. (This is the hardest path and what Sox players usually need.)

I received a great message last night. One of my former players just won the Idaho State Amateur. She's back living there and won a tough one against some really good players. I can't believe five years ago she was a volleyball playing freshman who played golf when that season was over.

I assume they have a tutor there as well.

F150. Make money on the weekend helping friends with inferior modes of transportation.

Thanks for the link. I love how the organization seems to be working on helping him to live comfortably in the US.

I love how we can find humor in the sad RF situation. On the plus side this will probably be his best chance at a MLB career. Good luck to him.

Sticking to managers I've been alive to see. Hmm, given enough time every manager stinks it up for a stretch and looks good for a stretch. For example Ozzie's final couple months may have been the worst stretch of "managing" I've seen by someone in a Sox uniform. He also had a great stretch in '05. I always think of Tony as the best. But that is partly because I was too young to really understand what Tanner was doing.

I agree. Juggling the work load and setting new priorities based on new items coming in I would consider a basic job skill. Unfortunately the jobs with the sort of rote routine that would work have been replaced by machines.

I was thinking about all the posters who announced the birth of their first child here. We're getting old.

Except when customers are expecting a service during specific hours or you are part of a team and the entire team needs to be productive at the same time. But yes, my daughter has a position that is work from anywhere there is an internet connection. But still there are times when she needs to be in the office at a specific time.

I was and still am the first one to work. As a manager I appreciated employees who were professional and arrived on time. I also was very accommodating for doctor's appointments, school meetings, and all those things that require people to leave for part of a day. But if you can't figure out how to be at work on time most days I assume you don't care much about the job. I remember one employee who was late literally half the time. His excuse was his commute was anywhere from 30 minutes to 45 minutes. He always left 30 minutes before his start and it wasn't his fault if he was late. I asked why he didn't just leave 45 minutes before work. His answer was he didn't want to be early. Do you think he was ever promoted?

There is the D league already.

What are you suggesting?

Fun fact. The murder rate is higher in Chicago than the DR. 24.1 per 100,000 Chicago 14.9 per 100,000 DR