My father loved to try out new vehicles. Mind you, he never bought one. He just loved to torture me back giving me a false sense of hope that we might actually get a new vehicle.
But we left Thibert's Chevrolet and Buick empty handed every time. But that never stopped Dad from heading in - usually wearing his most raggedy farm clothes - to try and barter with Gary, the owner.
I remember watching this particular Cosby Show episode with Dad. I couldn't help but smile at the similarities. Dad refused to agree with me, but it's spot on. And besides, I always thought of my dad as a southern white Bill Cosby. Both had a great sense of humor. Both talked slowly and moved at the same pace. Both had similar builds. Both were great fathers and men.
I know EXACTLY how Leo feels in this short clip.
Friday, April 30, 2010
An interesting idea
At times like these, I wish I taught history.
On my way to school yesterday, I listened to the new Dan Carlin Hardcore History podcast. He raises a very interesting scenario, which would be a great assignment for a history class.
He posits that there are two countries equal in man power, technology, natural resources, supplies, military, weapons, and size had to fight each other.
The only difference is that one is us and the other is our grandparents. Imagine if our generation (Gen X and the new Millennials) had to go up against the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomers.
Now, this hypothetical battle could take place at any point in time. We could be transported back in time to 1945. Or our grandparents could arrive in modern America and we could fight this war now.
Who would win?
How interesting. You can rule out our ability to use our technology because, remember, we are totally equal. The only difference is the people fighting the war.
My gut tells me we'd get slaughtered.
Not only were our ancestors hardier - think of the hardships they had to deal with (the great depression, infant mortality rates, more diseases, fewer amenities) compared to us.
As Mike, one of my colleagues, admitted to me when I ran this idea by him - grandfather might make his truck last for 15 or 20 years, but Mike - whose own truck was having some engine problems - was thinking of buying a new truck instead of having his current one fixed. It was just easier.
And wouldn't that be our major disadvantage? We have adapted to our easier lives. We certainly can't help this. It was a result of what the greatest generation and baby boomers did that allowed us to have such nice and cushy lives.
If we fought this war in 1945, could a modern person handle the decisions and repercussions that our ancestors did. Think of a bombing raid. A thousand planes aloft in the sky so they blot out the sun. Could you imagine seeing this today? I certainly can't imagine such a thing. But not only that - imagine each plane is loaded with tons and tons of bombs. So many bombs that they will destroy a city - schools, orphanages, churches, roads, water supplies, and so on - and will kill 10-15,000 people. Could we today handle such carnage?
Think of the deaths in Iraq for example. If 12 soldiers are killed, that makes the news. Our ancestors wouldn't blink at that. That many died in the first millisecond of the surge at Omaha Beach.
And if we fought the war today, would our ancestors think twice about using weapons of mass destruction? Certainly, they had little trouble using the atomic bomb. What would stop them from using nuclear weapons? At the end of the Korean War, MacArthur was pushing to use dozens of atomic bombs to spread cobalt radiation along the border between Korea and China to seal off the communists. I think today you'd be hard pressed to find a rational person who would even lobby for using nuclear weapons in Iraq.
We just seem soft. But, again, that is not necessarily our fault. We have grown this way because of the sacrifices of previous generations to make our lives easier. And our lives are certainly easier and safer.
Now I'm starting to wonder if we'd even stand a chance.
I think of just how tough our ancestors had to be. My father always told me that my grandmother had a brother who either died when he was born or shortly thereafter. He was buried in the same cemetery as my parents. But over the years, the grave was lost. Now no one knows where the child is buried.
Something like that happening today is unimaginable.
Think of the horrors the WWI and WWII vets witnessed. Yet, most were able to come back and return to a relatively normal way of life. Today, more vets commit suicide than actually die in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Now, this might be an unfair comparison, for who knows how many WWI or WWII vets really did commit suicide or just withdrew from society or drank themselves to death. That was just something that wasn't discussed like it is today.
Maybe we are not all that different from our ancestors. Yet, I can't help but think of all those hardships they had to endure (I recall asking Dad once what he would have done if his and Mom's hot water heater went out - they didn't have credit available as readily as today. Dad simply said, "Then we'd take cold showers until we had the cash to pay for it." That never happens today. Thanks to credit cards and zero percent financing, if we want something, we can have it now. Instant gratification. Or I think of how some boot camps in WWII would have to feed the new recruits for several weeks in order to put some pounds on them before sending them out because they were really starving during the depression. Now, if there was a draft, the boot camps would have to run an extra couple months to work the fat off the new recruits).
When I think of the hardships our ancestors had to endure, I can't help but think the battle would be over before it even began. We'd be wise to work out a pact of mutual non-aggression as soon as possible!
On my way to school yesterday, I listened to the new Dan Carlin Hardcore History podcast. He raises a very interesting scenario, which would be a great assignment for a history class.
He posits that there are two countries equal in man power, technology, natural resources, supplies, military, weapons, and size had to fight each other.
The only difference is that one is us and the other is our grandparents. Imagine if our generation (Gen X and the new Millennials) had to go up against the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomers.
Now, this hypothetical battle could take place at any point in time. We could be transported back in time to 1945. Or our grandparents could arrive in modern America and we could fight this war now.
Who would win?
How interesting. You can rule out our ability to use our technology because, remember, we are totally equal. The only difference is the people fighting the war.
My gut tells me we'd get slaughtered.
Not only were our ancestors hardier - think of the hardships they had to deal with (the great depression, infant mortality rates, more diseases, fewer amenities) compared to us.
As Mike, one of my colleagues, admitted to me when I ran this idea by him - grandfather might make his truck last for 15 or 20 years, but Mike - whose own truck was having some engine problems - was thinking of buying a new truck instead of having his current one fixed. It was just easier.
And wouldn't that be our major disadvantage? We have adapted to our easier lives. We certainly can't help this. It was a result of what the greatest generation and baby boomers did that allowed us to have such nice and cushy lives.
If we fought this war in 1945, could a modern person handle the decisions and repercussions that our ancestors did. Think of a bombing raid. A thousand planes aloft in the sky so they blot out the sun. Could you imagine seeing this today? I certainly can't imagine such a thing. But not only that - imagine each plane is loaded with tons and tons of bombs. So many bombs that they will destroy a city - schools, orphanages, churches, roads, water supplies, and so on - and will kill 10-15,000 people. Could we today handle such carnage?
Think of the deaths in Iraq for example. If 12 soldiers are killed, that makes the news. Our ancestors wouldn't blink at that. That many died in the first millisecond of the surge at Omaha Beach.
And if we fought the war today, would our ancestors think twice about using weapons of mass destruction? Certainly, they had little trouble using the atomic bomb. What would stop them from using nuclear weapons? At the end of the Korean War, MacArthur was pushing to use dozens of atomic bombs to spread cobalt radiation along the border between Korea and China to seal off the communists. I think today you'd be hard pressed to find a rational person who would even lobby for using nuclear weapons in Iraq.
We just seem soft. But, again, that is not necessarily our fault. We have grown this way because of the sacrifices of previous generations to make our lives easier. And our lives are certainly easier and safer.
Now I'm starting to wonder if we'd even stand a chance.
I think of just how tough our ancestors had to be. My father always told me that my grandmother had a brother who either died when he was born or shortly thereafter. He was buried in the same cemetery as my parents. But over the years, the grave was lost. Now no one knows where the child is buried.
Something like that happening today is unimaginable.
Think of the horrors the WWI and WWII vets witnessed. Yet, most were able to come back and return to a relatively normal way of life. Today, more vets commit suicide than actually die in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Now, this might be an unfair comparison, for who knows how many WWI or WWII vets really did commit suicide or just withdrew from society or drank themselves to death. That was just something that wasn't discussed like it is today.
Maybe we are not all that different from our ancestors. Yet, I can't help but think of all those hardships they had to endure (I recall asking Dad once what he would have done if his and Mom's hot water heater went out - they didn't have credit available as readily as today. Dad simply said, "Then we'd take cold showers until we had the cash to pay for it." That never happens today. Thanks to credit cards and zero percent financing, if we want something, we can have it now. Instant gratification. Or I think of how some boot camps in WWII would have to feed the new recruits for several weeks in order to put some pounds on them before sending them out because they were really starving during the depression. Now, if there was a draft, the boot camps would have to run an extra couple months to work the fat off the new recruits).
When I think of the hardships our ancestors had to endure, I can't help but think the battle would be over before it even began. We'd be wise to work out a pact of mutual non-aggression as soon as possible!
Thursday, April 29, 2010
KoKo's visit
I invited KoKo to visit Lincoln yesterday.
We rolled out the red carpet. As soon as we got to school, we stopped by our principal's office who shook her hand and charmed her from the start.
Then we were off to my room. KoKo wasn't sure about what she'd end up doing. I had two of my seniors lined up to show her the art program (which is one of the best in the area and would really allow KoKo to blossom), the band and choir departments (also the best in the area), abd the language departments (also very, very strong programs).
As soon as the bell rang, KoKo and I stood outside my door. Sheryl, our Spanish teacher, who is facebook buddies with KoKo, came over to say hi. Then another of KoKo's facebook buddies spotted her and asked if she'd like to come to her first block class . . . Spanish, which worked out perfectly.
KoKo pretty much spent the rest of the day with her friend. My seniors were able to give her a tour at the end of second block.
KoKo got to sit in on a Civics class (and scored an 8/10 on the quiz Mr. Nordine made her take). Then she attended band and even got to go bowling for gym.
She was absolutely giddy by the end of the day.
To top it off, she will be my guest at the senior honor's banquet on Thursday, where I have the privilege of giving the faculty response. This evening also happens to be the Magnet Arts's "Evening with the Arts." KoKo will be able to see some of the projects she'd be able to do if she enrolls in our Magnet program.
We rolled out the red carpet. As soon as we got to school, we stopped by our principal's office who shook her hand and charmed her from the start.
Then we were off to my room. KoKo wasn't sure about what she'd end up doing. I had two of my seniors lined up to show her the art program (which is one of the best in the area and would really allow KoKo to blossom), the band and choir departments (also the best in the area), abd the language departments (also very, very strong programs).
As soon as the bell rang, KoKo and I stood outside my door. Sheryl, our Spanish teacher, who is facebook buddies with KoKo, came over to say hi. Then another of KoKo's facebook buddies spotted her and asked if she'd like to come to her first block class . . . Spanish, which worked out perfectly.
KoKo pretty much spent the rest of the day with her friend. My seniors were able to give her a tour at the end of second block.
KoKo got to sit in on a Civics class (and scored an 8/10 on the quiz Mr. Nordine made her take). Then she attended band and even got to go bowling for gym.
She was absolutely giddy by the end of the day.
To top it off, she will be my guest at the senior honor's banquet on Thursday, where I have the privilege of giving the faculty response. This evening also happens to be the Magnet Arts's "Evening with the Arts." KoKo will be able to see some of the projects she'd be able to do if she enrolls in our Magnet program.
A new green 'tipping point' or 'flattener'
Maybe this oil spill fiasco - and soon to be economic/ecological disaster - will prove ten years from now to be a 'flattener' for the much needed green revolution.
Maybe one day we'll look back at this the way we look back at the wall coming down.
I'm glad to hear the Obama administration rethinking the stupid idea to continue more offshore drilling.
Start the revolution. Let Exxon and BP go the way of the old typewriter companies, cassettes, and videos.
And isn't it funny how a billion dollar company like BP suddenly is looking for the good old government - and the tax payers - to bail them out of this mess. That alone is enough to want to drive those bastards out of business.
Maybe one day we'll look back at this the way we look back at the wall coming down.
I'm glad to hear the Obama administration rethinking the stupid idea to continue more offshore drilling.
Start the revolution. Let Exxon and BP go the way of the old typewriter companies, cassettes, and videos.
And isn't it funny how a billion dollar company like BP suddenly is looking for the good old government - and the tax payers - to bail them out of this mess. That alone is enough to want to drive those bastards out of business.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Ten Flatteners
Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat is a great read. The man (a former Minnesotan too) has a gift for taking complex subjects and making them perfectly lucid for the average person.
Friedman argues that our world has gone through three eras of globalization, each shrinking the world in size. Globalization 1.0 was when Columbus discovered the new world, and he shrunk the world to a size medium. People went global through their countries.
Globalization 2.0 was when in the early 1800s up until 2000. Companies working across the globe shrunk it to a size small. People went global through their companies.
Globalization 3.0 just happened. Fiber optic cables, telecommunication satellites, and personal computers hooked up to the world wide web shrunk the world to a size extra small. People went global on their own.
Now, Friedman chronicles how ten forces/events led to our modern 'flat' world --
1. 11/9/89. The fall of the Iron Curtain. Or as Friedman calls it - The New Age of Creativity: When the Walls Came Down and the Windows Went Up.
Simply put, this was the end of communism. East meets West. People were free to move and interact and exchange ideas and culture (and goods - don't forget this was great for capitalism). Plus, it allowed us to really see inside the Iron Curtain and to see how poorly off our supposed enemies during the Cold War really had it.
But even better, you had the PC revolution sweeping through where any person with a computer could now share their ideas. The wall was intended to keep ideas in. How can you do that when everyone has access to a PC and the ability to share their ideas? Just look at how China is attempting to censor Google now.
The wall coming down allowed new ideas to spread and be shared. Or as Friedman notes - "Think of what one person can do with a typewriter. And then think of what one person can do with a PC."
As one who has angered various parties over this very blog, I can certainly attest to that!
2. 8/9/95. Here comes the net and the World Wide Web (they are NOT the same thing). Or The New Age of Connectivity: When the Web Went Around and Netscape Went Public.
Simply put - The Net is a bunch of cables connecting computers and servers. The World Wide Web, invented by Berners-Lee, is a global hypertext system that allows a person at a computer to use the net to share documents, sounds, videos and information.
That's all fine and dandy, but it really wasn't until the company Netscape created the first internet browser (an application that allowed computers to easily access the web and surf it) that the internet began to take off and revolutionize the entire world.
I try to think of it like this - until the Interstates were constructed - one could navigate their way around the country, but it was cumbersome, terribly inefficient, and not for the feint of heart. However, once the Interstates were in place, suddenly traffic could flow easily. Anyone with a map and decent vehicle could easily traverse the country.
Netscape's browser (which was the first way I surfed the internet all the way back in 1996) made it possible for anyone - whether a child or grandparent - to get on a computer and use the internet.
And think of it, how often do we not use the internet? Suddenly, we can find the answer to anything. Suddenly, we have an unimaginable amount of information at our fingertips. Suddenly, we have the ability to interact with others. Suddenly, we can upload pictures, music, and videos and share it with anyone. Mostly for free. When in the history of our world has that ever been possible?
3. Work Flow Software
This simply means that software became relatively universal. We forget what it was like in the old 80's and early 90's when computers didn't connect. Friedman notes that you might work in a company and the accounting department works with one set of computers designed to crunch numbers. However, those computers and their software couldn't connect with the computers in HR, who needed a different computer and software for their specific tasks. Of course, neither of those computers worked with the computers and software employees had at home, which varied with each employee.
But that doesn't happen now. The fact that any of you reading this - whether at home, school, a university, or on your phone - is an example of work flow software. Regardless of your Mac, Dell, Toshiba, Sony, iPhone, or BlackBerry, you can still navigate your way to teacherscribe - even if you're using safari, firefox, or explorer. If I include a link to iTunes, you can click on it and - again regardless of your computer - arrive at the iTunes store. If I embed a video from youtube, the same will happen.
But that was unimaginable 20 years ago. When computers and their software began to connect, suddenly work could 'flow' at an incredible speed.
Here's a great example from Friedman's book - he interviews the head of a cartoon production company. The man explains how the make something from nothing thanks to their work flow software. The cartoon is called Higglytown Heroes. But it doesn't reside in one specific place. The recording session is done close to the artists (usually NY or LA). However, the writers do their work from their homes (Florida, London, NY, Chicago, and LA). The animation is done in Bangalore, India. The animation is then edited in San Francisco. Actors record their voices over the internet. And then the show is assembled.
Amazing, isn't it?
On a personal level, this software flow happened first semester when I was home with a sick daughter. While she napped, I basically taught and ran my class from our dinning room table and my MacBook. I emailed my lesson plans to a colleague. Students texted and emailed me questions. And I answered each one individually. Finally, when I couldn't get an issue straightened out, I called a student. He turned his phone up, put me on speaker phone, and set the phone down on his desk and we had ourselves a bit of a 'conference call' with me explaining things and then taking questions. The sub just had to make sure the kids stayed in the room. That's how efficient work can flow in a flattened world.
4. Uploading - Harnessing the Power of Communities.
The internet allows people to connect and upload information like never before. Two quick examples - blogs and wikis.
A blog, simply a 'weblog' allows people like me to upload their ideas and opinions to the net for all to read. Furthermore, it allows me to share music, video, and pictures. Anyone can partake in this. For free.
Suddenly, people began uploading their content to the web. This allowed for an immense amount of sharing and interacting and learning. Suddenly, I can read a blog from a teacher in another country or chronicle the ups and downs of a student teacher in Washington, DC.
Family members can keep in touch and share content for free. Remember that not that long ago before cell phones, long distance rates were as high as $2 for a minute. Now that's unimaginable.
Again, we take this for granted today. But how soon we forget what life was like 25 years ago when none of this existed.
Wikipedia is the best example of a wiki. People everywhere can log on and upload their knowledge. Now, some of the info is bogus. But a lot of it is up to date (when the bridge collapsed in the cities a few years ago, Wikipedia had the first story and the most credible information thanks to witnesses who logged on and shared their info). And again, it's all free.
When I was a kid doing a research paper on dinosaurs (eighth grade I think). I was at the mercy of our small town public library. I recall searching through the card catalog and reference books. Freed from them, I was at the mercy of our librarians ability to retrieve the books and National Geographics. But then I was at the mercy of the magazines themselves and their former users. What if someone had lost a copy or torn out a page? I was screwed. Then if I couldn't find it at our library, I was at the mercy of the inter-library loan system. If I couldn't find a source, I had to do without. And my education experience was lessened.
That never happens with Wikipedia. And even if the information isn't always credible on Wikipedia, it's riddled with hyperlinks, so that I can be led from Wikipedia to more reliable sources.
5. Outsourcing Y2K.
This means simply the rise of India. What India did very well was educate the children of the elite. They set up first class engineering, math, and science programs in their universities. Today, they have some of the best programs in the world. Now, they attempt to educate more and more of their population. In fact, the number of engineering degrees earned are by Indians.
It used to be that great minds had to come to America to be education. That's not the case anymore, and India is an excellent example of that. Now they come to America for jobs (just try and find an American doctor or professor . . .).
As a result of this emphasis in engineering, math, and science, India had a large surplus of talented workers. Initially, their talents were wasted - or at least not fully utilized.
But when American companies - thanks to the previous flatteners - could now outsource their work to other countries (namely India), it took all of one nano-second to realize that India was going to be doing a lot of our work for a lot less money. Suddenly, that vast educated class of workers (I'm sure you've seen the slogan "India and China have more honor students than we have students") could handle all of the skilled jobs that could possible be outsourced (accounting, lawyering, and tech support).
Now, this flattener scares the hell out of me. For our society is no longer based on pure labor. We need knowledge workers. India made a conscious effort to educate and train their young people. America is trying to do the same thing (NCLB, RTTT, the profiles of Learning . . .), yet our efforts don't stick - for whatever reason. Will our young people be able to face (let alone thrive) in a knowledge economy?
If we don't, China and India sure as hell will.
6. Offshoring or Running with Gazelles, Eating with Lions
China joins the World Trade Organization. I think Walmart is king of this. While they sell products in every damn town in the country, everything else about Walmart is done in China (just try to find something in there that isn't made in China). Suddenly, it became easier to pick up and move production to China.
As Congressman George Miller put it when addressing the National Press Club: "We thought it was going to be great when China opened up. This was going to be great. We can sell everything to China. Little did we know that they'd be selling us the fuselage for the advanced fighter planes."
How quickly China closed in on us.
As Friedman observes, "Ever since the Chinese joined the WTO, both they and the rest of the world have had to run faster and faster (to stay competitive)".
But American companies aren't just picking up and moving to China.
Soon, American companies began to build in India, namely Bangalore, so much so that if you travel down the streets, you can't help but see American businesses everywhere (check out the 30 Days on Outsourcing for a really interesting look at this).
How has this flattened the world? Well, the bulk of what we buy just isn't made here. That wasn't the case fifty years ago.
The landscape for employment and opportunity has changed. As Oded Shekar tells American companies: "If you still make anything labor intensive, get out now rather than bleed to death [because you are losing money by not having it made in China or India]."
Thus, we have a knowledge economy. Again, as George Miller states "Innovation and discovery are the only viable sources for economic growth and development."
Notice production isn't in that equation. Our students and future workers have to be able to innovate and discover in order to thrive, not just labor away. This is the total opposite of what the workforce was when my father entered it when you didn't need a high school diploma to find a job as a laborer and provide for your family.
In fact, my father never could have imagined the most sought after job today: search engine optimizers.
7. Supply-Chain or Eating Sushi in Arkansas
There might not be a greater achievement in business that the supply-chain.
What this means is total efficiency. Or at least the illusion of it.
In America (if not the world) Walmart is king at this.
If you pull a product off the shelf in a Walmart in Thief River Falls, as soon as you go through the check out, the bar code on that product is scanned.
That simple little innocuous event that you don't even notice because you're fishing out your wallet or scanning those magazines they keep on the end-caps is the start of something so complex and amazing, that it is a feat to behold.
For that is the start of the supply-chain. That barcode is sent out as a signal to the supplier's factory (whether that's in China or India or America) telling the supplier that Walmart needs another item. That sets in motion an order at that supplier. That supplier will ship a box full of that item (and hundreds of others that it supplies Walmart with) to Walmart's headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas where Walmart's 1.2 million-square-foot distribution center resides. In fact, hundreds of different products arrive from suppliers all over the globe. A great system separates all the boxes and figures out where to send them so that in a week's time a new box shows up to Walmart in TRF with a fresh supply of the item you bought just last week. And this happens 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Now, I'm not trying to say that this is flawless. How many times have we gone to Walmart and not find what we're looking for? But that is a far cry from 25 years ago when you simply had to make do with whatever your local hardware store decided to stock and sell (at a much higher price than Walmart).
So what, you say. Well, just think of ALL the products Walmart sells - from computers, TVs, paint, toys, to groceries. Then think of the massive supply-chain they have developed over the years to supply their customers' needs.
Only in a flat world could something so complex work so well.
8. Insourcing or What the Guys in the Funny Brown Shorts Are Really Doing
Yep, that's UPS Friedman is talking about.
UPS (and Fed Ex) aren't just delivering packages. They'd adapted to this flat world and shown how businesses - if they want to thrive in a flat world - have to adapt and change . . . or die (do not ask, dear US Postal Service, for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee). No. UPS isn't just delivering your package. They've taken it one step - an absolutely paramount step - further. They now hand internal logistics.
What the hell does that mean?
UPS synchronizes supply chains for companies large and small. Just look at what UPS and Fed Ex do for Digi Key. They don't simply ship stuff. They handle internal logistics.
Another example that Friedman offers - let's say your Toshiba laptop breaks. You call Toshiba and they say drop it off at the UPS store. Then several days later you get it back - again from UPS - and it works. And you assume it was sent off to the Toshiba headquarters to get fixed.
Not.
UPS has insourced all of Toshiba's internal logistics. That means Toshiba doesn't have to even worry about your laptop. UPS handles it all.
After you drop off your laptop at their store, they send it to a great big airplane hanger in Louisville where a guy in funny brown shorts actually fixes your computer and then sends it back to you. UPS has made it more efficient for Toshiba to insource all of this to UPS rather than have to do it themselves. How ingenious is that?
Think of that the next time you order something from Amazon. How do you think you get it the next day by noon? It comes from other UPS hubs that stock items for Amazon. You buy a new pair of Nike shoes and want them by noon the next day. It's not like Nike ships them from their headquarters on a super fast plane to get them to you the very next day. They call up UPS to handle it. Nike has insourced UPS to handle their internal logistics because it's easier and cheaper to have UPS handle it than Nike.
Talk about collaboration and cooperation. It's like two organism working together and living off of each other for mutual survival. There are numerous companies who no longer handle any of their own products: UPS handles it all. Ingenious.
9. In-Forming or Google, Yahoo! MSN Web Search
How Google has changed our lives.
Ever Google yourself? Try it and see what you find. You might be surprised.
Just spend a day - or an hour - on Google and see what you can find or learn. Thanks to the presentation "Shift Happens," we know there are 2.9 billion searches performed on Google each month. One must then ask the key question: to whom were these questions addressed BG (before Google)?
This allows us - as individuals - to collaborate with an unprecedented amount of data any time we want.
This is a great equalizer. If I log on to Google and so does a kid in Brazil and a professor in India and a grandmother in Omaha, we all have the same access to the same research and information. No longer are the keys to the kingdom, so to speak, only held by a few.
10. The Steroids or Digital, Mobile, Personal, and Virtual
These - as Friedman states - are simply such things as file sharing, wireless, and cellular. These are turbo charging all these new forms of collaboration. This allows us to do any type of collaboration and creation from any where at any time from just about any device totally mobile.
On a small scale, I did this last fall on a trip to Mayville. I took the day off from school to move our patio furniture into storage. The previous night I had posted a rather infamous blog entry about KoKo's playing time. No sooner had I gotten out of town before that little red light began flashing on my BlackBerry. It was an email from a coach who took issue with my blog. I pulled over and typed a response trying to smooth things over and explain where I was coming from.
Then I headed south on 32. I had brought my iPod Classic. I had ripped a new Biography episode of Edgar Allan Poe on it. I wanted to preview it on my way to Mayville. However, I soon began thinking about a reading guide I wanted to put together as I listened to the episode. So I took out my BlackBerry again and began using the "Notes" app on it to type out my questions.
Prior to Crookston, I had received another email from the same coach. So I pulled over and typed another response. In the meantime, I used my BlackBerry to check out my blog and to see that my little blog counter at the bottom was going nuts. Lots of hits on the blog as it was emailed around and became a hot topic.
I turned at Neilsville and had to pull over to send off another email. By the time I was to Mayville, I had sent numerous emails, made a couple calls, checked my blog, finished the EAP Biography, and typed up a reading guide to go with it.
On the way back, I received an email from the athletic director. So I swung in to Caribou Coffee for a coffee and their free wi-fi. I had my MacBook with, so I opened it up and sent off yet another email. I also put up a follow up blog entry clarifying my initial blog entry.
After that, it was a relatively uneventful ride home, but look at all the work I got done - totally mobile (mostly sitting in Casey's 1996 Chevy Silverado) and totally wireless.
Oh yeah, I probably got 50 texts from students asking questions about their essays and readings, so I was also able to still help run my class and stay in the loop.
That's a flat world.
Want more proof? When the ash cloud grounded much of Europe, the Norwegian Prime Minister, stranded in the use was able to run the government using an iPad. Now, that is the ultimate test to living in a flat world.
Now, after these 10 flatteners, the trick will be trying to find our places in this flat world and staying economically viable. No easy feat! But what exciting times to be alive.
Friedman argues that our world has gone through three eras of globalization, each shrinking the world in size. Globalization 1.0 was when Columbus discovered the new world, and he shrunk the world to a size medium. People went global through their countries.
Globalization 2.0 was when in the early 1800s up until 2000. Companies working across the globe shrunk it to a size small. People went global through their companies.
Globalization 3.0 just happened. Fiber optic cables, telecommunication satellites, and personal computers hooked up to the world wide web shrunk the world to a size extra small. People went global on their own.
Now, Friedman chronicles how ten forces/events led to our modern 'flat' world --
1. 11/9/89. The fall of the Iron Curtain. Or as Friedman calls it - The New Age of Creativity: When the Walls Came Down and the Windows Went Up.
Simply put, this was the end of communism. East meets West. People were free to move and interact and exchange ideas and culture (and goods - don't forget this was great for capitalism). Plus, it allowed us to really see inside the Iron Curtain and to see how poorly off our supposed enemies during the Cold War really had it.
But even better, you had the PC revolution sweeping through where any person with a computer could now share their ideas. The wall was intended to keep ideas in. How can you do that when everyone has access to a PC and the ability to share their ideas? Just look at how China is attempting to censor Google now.
The wall coming down allowed new ideas to spread and be shared. Or as Friedman notes - "Think of what one person can do with a typewriter. And then think of what one person can do with a PC."
As one who has angered various parties over this very blog, I can certainly attest to that!
2. 8/9/95. Here comes the net and the World Wide Web (they are NOT the same thing). Or The New Age of Connectivity: When the Web Went Around and Netscape Went Public.
Simply put - The Net is a bunch of cables connecting computers and servers. The World Wide Web, invented by Berners-Lee, is a global hypertext system that allows a person at a computer to use the net to share documents, sounds, videos and information.
That's all fine and dandy, but it really wasn't until the company Netscape created the first internet browser (an application that allowed computers to easily access the web and surf it) that the internet began to take off and revolutionize the entire world.
I try to think of it like this - until the Interstates were constructed - one could navigate their way around the country, but it was cumbersome, terribly inefficient, and not for the feint of heart. However, once the Interstates were in place, suddenly traffic could flow easily. Anyone with a map and decent vehicle could easily traverse the country.
Netscape's browser (which was the first way I surfed the internet all the way back in 1996) made it possible for anyone - whether a child or grandparent - to get on a computer and use the internet.
And think of it, how often do we not use the internet? Suddenly, we can find the answer to anything. Suddenly, we have an unimaginable amount of information at our fingertips. Suddenly, we have the ability to interact with others. Suddenly, we can upload pictures, music, and videos and share it with anyone. Mostly for free. When in the history of our world has that ever been possible?
3. Work Flow Software
This simply means that software became relatively universal. We forget what it was like in the old 80's and early 90's when computers didn't connect. Friedman notes that you might work in a company and the accounting department works with one set of computers designed to crunch numbers. However, those computers and their software couldn't connect with the computers in HR, who needed a different computer and software for their specific tasks. Of course, neither of those computers worked with the computers and software employees had at home, which varied with each employee.
But that doesn't happen now. The fact that any of you reading this - whether at home, school, a university, or on your phone - is an example of work flow software. Regardless of your Mac, Dell, Toshiba, Sony, iPhone, or BlackBerry, you can still navigate your way to teacherscribe - even if you're using safari, firefox, or explorer. If I include a link to iTunes, you can click on it and - again regardless of your computer - arrive at the iTunes store. If I embed a video from youtube, the same will happen.
But that was unimaginable 20 years ago. When computers and their software began to connect, suddenly work could 'flow' at an incredible speed.
Here's a great example from Friedman's book - he interviews the head of a cartoon production company. The man explains how the make something from nothing thanks to their work flow software. The cartoon is called Higglytown Heroes. But it doesn't reside in one specific place. The recording session is done close to the artists (usually NY or LA). However, the writers do their work from their homes (Florida, London, NY, Chicago, and LA). The animation is done in Bangalore, India. The animation is then edited in San Francisco. Actors record their voices over the internet. And then the show is assembled.
Amazing, isn't it?
On a personal level, this software flow happened first semester when I was home with a sick daughter. While she napped, I basically taught and ran my class from our dinning room table and my MacBook. I emailed my lesson plans to a colleague. Students texted and emailed me questions. And I answered each one individually. Finally, when I couldn't get an issue straightened out, I called a student. He turned his phone up, put me on speaker phone, and set the phone down on his desk and we had ourselves a bit of a 'conference call' with me explaining things and then taking questions. The sub just had to make sure the kids stayed in the room. That's how efficient work can flow in a flattened world.
4. Uploading - Harnessing the Power of Communities.
The internet allows people to connect and upload information like never before. Two quick examples - blogs and wikis.
A blog, simply a 'weblog' allows people like me to upload their ideas and opinions to the net for all to read. Furthermore, it allows me to share music, video, and pictures. Anyone can partake in this. For free.
Suddenly, people began uploading their content to the web. This allowed for an immense amount of sharing and interacting and learning. Suddenly, I can read a blog from a teacher in another country or chronicle the ups and downs of a student teacher in Washington, DC.
Family members can keep in touch and share content for free. Remember that not that long ago before cell phones, long distance rates were as high as $2 for a minute. Now that's unimaginable.
Again, we take this for granted today. But how soon we forget what life was like 25 years ago when none of this existed.
Wikipedia is the best example of a wiki. People everywhere can log on and upload their knowledge. Now, some of the info is bogus. But a lot of it is up to date (when the bridge collapsed in the cities a few years ago, Wikipedia had the first story and the most credible information thanks to witnesses who logged on and shared their info). And again, it's all free.
When I was a kid doing a research paper on dinosaurs (eighth grade I think). I was at the mercy of our small town public library. I recall searching through the card catalog and reference books. Freed from them, I was at the mercy of our librarians ability to retrieve the books and National Geographics. But then I was at the mercy of the magazines themselves and their former users. What if someone had lost a copy or torn out a page? I was screwed. Then if I couldn't find it at our library, I was at the mercy of the inter-library loan system. If I couldn't find a source, I had to do without. And my education experience was lessened.
That never happens with Wikipedia. And even if the information isn't always credible on Wikipedia, it's riddled with hyperlinks, so that I can be led from Wikipedia to more reliable sources.
5. Outsourcing Y2K.
This means simply the rise of India. What India did very well was educate the children of the elite. They set up first class engineering, math, and science programs in their universities. Today, they have some of the best programs in the world. Now, they attempt to educate more and more of their population. In fact, the number of engineering degrees earned are by Indians.
It used to be that great minds had to come to America to be education. That's not the case anymore, and India is an excellent example of that. Now they come to America for jobs (just try and find an American doctor or professor . . .).
As a result of this emphasis in engineering, math, and science, India had a large surplus of talented workers. Initially, their talents were wasted - or at least not fully utilized.
But when American companies - thanks to the previous flatteners - could now outsource their work to other countries (namely India), it took all of one nano-second to realize that India was going to be doing a lot of our work for a lot less money. Suddenly, that vast educated class of workers (I'm sure you've seen the slogan "India and China have more honor students than we have students") could handle all of the skilled jobs that could possible be outsourced (accounting, lawyering, and tech support).
Now, this flattener scares the hell out of me. For our society is no longer based on pure labor. We need knowledge workers. India made a conscious effort to educate and train their young people. America is trying to do the same thing (NCLB, RTTT, the profiles of Learning . . .), yet our efforts don't stick - for whatever reason. Will our young people be able to face (let alone thrive) in a knowledge economy?
If we don't, China and India sure as hell will.
6. Offshoring or Running with Gazelles, Eating with Lions
China joins the World Trade Organization. I think Walmart is king of this. While they sell products in every damn town in the country, everything else about Walmart is done in China (just try to find something in there that isn't made in China). Suddenly, it became easier to pick up and move production to China.
As Congressman George Miller put it when addressing the National Press Club: "We thought it was going to be great when China opened up. This was going to be great. We can sell everything to China. Little did we know that they'd be selling us the fuselage for the advanced fighter planes."
How quickly China closed in on us.
As Friedman observes, "Ever since the Chinese joined the WTO, both they and the rest of the world have had to run faster and faster (to stay competitive)".
But American companies aren't just picking up and moving to China.
Soon, American companies began to build in India, namely Bangalore, so much so that if you travel down the streets, you can't help but see American businesses everywhere (check out the 30 Days on Outsourcing for a really interesting look at this).
How has this flattened the world? Well, the bulk of what we buy just isn't made here. That wasn't the case fifty years ago.
The landscape for employment and opportunity has changed. As Oded Shekar tells American companies: "If you still make anything labor intensive, get out now rather than bleed to death [because you are losing money by not having it made in China or India]."
Thus, we have a knowledge economy. Again, as George Miller states "Innovation and discovery are the only viable sources for economic growth and development."
Notice production isn't in that equation. Our students and future workers have to be able to innovate and discover in order to thrive, not just labor away. This is the total opposite of what the workforce was when my father entered it when you didn't need a high school diploma to find a job as a laborer and provide for your family.
In fact, my father never could have imagined the most sought after job today: search engine optimizers.
7. Supply-Chain or Eating Sushi in Arkansas
There might not be a greater achievement in business that the supply-chain.
What this means is total efficiency. Or at least the illusion of it.
In America (if not the world) Walmart is king at this.
If you pull a product off the shelf in a Walmart in Thief River Falls, as soon as you go through the check out, the bar code on that product is scanned.
That simple little innocuous event that you don't even notice because you're fishing out your wallet or scanning those magazines they keep on the end-caps is the start of something so complex and amazing, that it is a feat to behold.
For that is the start of the supply-chain. That barcode is sent out as a signal to the supplier's factory (whether that's in China or India or America) telling the supplier that Walmart needs another item. That sets in motion an order at that supplier. That supplier will ship a box full of that item (and hundreds of others that it supplies Walmart with) to Walmart's headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas where Walmart's 1.2 million-square-foot distribution center resides. In fact, hundreds of different products arrive from suppliers all over the globe. A great system separates all the boxes and figures out where to send them so that in a week's time a new box shows up to Walmart in TRF with a fresh supply of the item you bought just last week. And this happens 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Now, I'm not trying to say that this is flawless. How many times have we gone to Walmart and not find what we're looking for? But that is a far cry from 25 years ago when you simply had to make do with whatever your local hardware store decided to stock and sell (at a much higher price than Walmart).
So what, you say. Well, just think of ALL the products Walmart sells - from computers, TVs, paint, toys, to groceries. Then think of the massive supply-chain they have developed over the years to supply their customers' needs.
Only in a flat world could something so complex work so well.
8. Insourcing or What the Guys in the Funny Brown Shorts Are Really Doing
Yep, that's UPS Friedman is talking about.
UPS (and Fed Ex) aren't just delivering packages. They'd adapted to this flat world and shown how businesses - if they want to thrive in a flat world - have to adapt and change . . . or die (do not ask, dear US Postal Service, for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee). No. UPS isn't just delivering your package. They've taken it one step - an absolutely paramount step - further. They now hand internal logistics.
What the hell does that mean?
UPS synchronizes supply chains for companies large and small. Just look at what UPS and Fed Ex do for Digi Key. They don't simply ship stuff. They handle internal logistics.
Another example that Friedman offers - let's say your Toshiba laptop breaks. You call Toshiba and they say drop it off at the UPS store. Then several days later you get it back - again from UPS - and it works. And you assume it was sent off to the Toshiba headquarters to get fixed.
Not.
UPS has insourced all of Toshiba's internal logistics. That means Toshiba doesn't have to even worry about your laptop. UPS handles it all.
After you drop off your laptop at their store, they send it to a great big airplane hanger in Louisville where a guy in funny brown shorts actually fixes your computer and then sends it back to you. UPS has made it more efficient for Toshiba to insource all of this to UPS rather than have to do it themselves. How ingenious is that?
Think of that the next time you order something from Amazon. How do you think you get it the next day by noon? It comes from other UPS hubs that stock items for Amazon. You buy a new pair of Nike shoes and want them by noon the next day. It's not like Nike ships them from their headquarters on a super fast plane to get them to you the very next day. They call up UPS to handle it. Nike has insourced UPS to handle their internal logistics because it's easier and cheaper to have UPS handle it than Nike.
Talk about collaboration and cooperation. It's like two organism working together and living off of each other for mutual survival. There are numerous companies who no longer handle any of their own products: UPS handles it all. Ingenious.
9. In-Forming or Google, Yahoo! MSN Web Search
How Google has changed our lives.
Ever Google yourself? Try it and see what you find. You might be surprised.
Just spend a day - or an hour - on Google and see what you can find or learn. Thanks to the presentation "Shift Happens," we know there are 2.9 billion searches performed on Google each month. One must then ask the key question: to whom were these questions addressed BG (before Google)?
This allows us - as individuals - to collaborate with an unprecedented amount of data any time we want.
This is a great equalizer. If I log on to Google and so does a kid in Brazil and a professor in India and a grandmother in Omaha, we all have the same access to the same research and information. No longer are the keys to the kingdom, so to speak, only held by a few.
10. The Steroids or Digital, Mobile, Personal, and Virtual
These - as Friedman states - are simply such things as file sharing, wireless, and cellular. These are turbo charging all these new forms of collaboration. This allows us to do any type of collaboration and creation from any where at any time from just about any device totally mobile.
On a small scale, I did this last fall on a trip to Mayville. I took the day off from school to move our patio furniture into storage. The previous night I had posted a rather infamous blog entry about KoKo's playing time. No sooner had I gotten out of town before that little red light began flashing on my BlackBerry. It was an email from a coach who took issue with my blog. I pulled over and typed a response trying to smooth things over and explain where I was coming from.
Then I headed south on 32. I had brought my iPod Classic. I had ripped a new Biography episode of Edgar Allan Poe on it. I wanted to preview it on my way to Mayville. However, I soon began thinking about a reading guide I wanted to put together as I listened to the episode. So I took out my BlackBerry again and began using the "Notes" app on it to type out my questions.
Prior to Crookston, I had received another email from the same coach. So I pulled over and typed another response. In the meantime, I used my BlackBerry to check out my blog and to see that my little blog counter at the bottom was going nuts. Lots of hits on the blog as it was emailed around and became a hot topic.
I turned at Neilsville and had to pull over to send off another email. By the time I was to Mayville, I had sent numerous emails, made a couple calls, checked my blog, finished the EAP Biography, and typed up a reading guide to go with it.
On the way back, I received an email from the athletic director. So I swung in to Caribou Coffee for a coffee and their free wi-fi. I had my MacBook with, so I opened it up and sent off yet another email. I also put up a follow up blog entry clarifying my initial blog entry.
After that, it was a relatively uneventful ride home, but look at all the work I got done - totally mobile (mostly sitting in Casey's 1996 Chevy Silverado) and totally wireless.
Oh yeah, I probably got 50 texts from students asking questions about their essays and readings, so I was also able to still help run my class and stay in the loop.
That's a flat world.
Want more proof? When the ash cloud grounded much of Europe, the Norwegian Prime Minister, stranded in the use was able to run the government using an iPad. Now, that is the ultimate test to living in a flat world.
Now, after these 10 flatteners, the trick will be trying to find our places in this flat world and staying economically viable. No easy feat! But what exciting times to be alive.
The Little Things
As a teacher I often get down.
My fourth hour is not the most motivated group. In fact, with The Jungle looming - and them just wanting me to tell them what to think - I've made a decision: that's exactly what I'm going to do. I'm dividing the block into three chunks - the first ten to fifteen minutes will be review - the next 45-50 will be work and reading - the final 10-15 will be daily work or where I assign homework and review the lesson. That's about a Madaline Hunter as it gets. But I'm tired of trying to get these kids to discuss and partake. Maybe this will work instead.
A few writers in my first block - all seniors - have cashed it in or chose to just play it safe.
My third block - mostly juniors - is still going strong.
But then just when I feel like I'm worn out from trying to make kids care and to work and to accomplish, I get a text from a student at 4:15 in the afternoon wondering if their approach to the MGRP would work. I get another from a student wondering how to Zamzar so they can get video off of Youtube for their iMovie project. Then I get another text about the film we just watched, Little Miss Sunshine.
Those are the bright spots. Gotta appreciated them
My fourth hour is not the most motivated group. In fact, with The Jungle looming - and them just wanting me to tell them what to think - I've made a decision: that's exactly what I'm going to do. I'm dividing the block into three chunks - the first ten to fifteen minutes will be review - the next 45-50 will be work and reading - the final 10-15 will be daily work or where I assign homework and review the lesson. That's about a Madaline Hunter as it gets. But I'm tired of trying to get these kids to discuss and partake. Maybe this will work instead.
A few writers in my first block - all seniors - have cashed it in or chose to just play it safe.
My third block - mostly juniors - is still going strong.
But then just when I feel like I'm worn out from trying to make kids care and to work and to accomplish, I get a text from a student at 4:15 in the afternoon wondering if their approach to the MGRP would work. I get another from a student wondering how to Zamzar so they can get video off of Youtube for their iMovie project. Then I get another text about the film we just watched, Little Miss Sunshine.
Those are the bright spots. Gotta appreciated them
Monday, April 26, 2010
One way of looking at outsourcing
Initially, I was totally against outsourcing. It seems so unAmerican.
Then I had a student write a paper advocating it. He raised several good points.
Later, I watched a great 30 Days episode on outsourcing where a computer programmer spends 30 days living in India with the people who had outsourced his job.
Initially, the American computer programmer is outraged - rightfully so - at having his job outsourced to the lowest bidder in Bangalore India. However, his father - at dinner the night before he flies out - lays down some very good reasons for outsourcing.
Now, I just read an interesting letter in The World is Flat from David Schlesinger, the global managing editor for Reuters news service, that illustrated for me that maybe outsourcing really isn't so unAmerican after all. In fact, it might be very American!
Then I had a student write a paper advocating it. He raised several good points.
Later, I watched a great 30 Days episode on outsourcing where a computer programmer spends 30 days living in India with the people who had outsourced his job.
Initially, the American computer programmer is outraged - rightfully so - at having his job outsourced to the lowest bidder in Bangalore India. However, his father - at dinner the night before he flies out - lays down some very good reasons for outsourcing.
Now, I just read an interesting letter in The World is Flat from David Schlesinger, the global managing editor for Reuters news service, that illustrated for me that maybe outsourcing really isn't so unAmerican after all. In fact, it might be very American!
Off-Shoring with Obligation
I grew up in New London, Connecticut, which in the 19th century was a major whaling center. In the 1960's and 1970's the whales were long gone and the major employers in the region were connected with the military -- not a surprise during the Vietnam era. My classmates' parents worked at Electric Boat, the Navy and the Coast Guard. The peace dividend changed the region once again, and now it is best known for the great gambling casinos of Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods and for the pharmaceutical researchers of Pfizer. Jobs went; jobs were created. Skills went out of use; new skills were required. The region changed; people changed. New London, of course, was not unique. How many mill towns saw their mills close; how many shoe towns saw the shoe industry move elsewhere; how many towns that were once textile powerhouses now buy all their lines from China? Change is hard. Change is hardest on those caught by surprise. Change is hardest on those who have difficulty changing too. But change is natural; change is not new; change is important. The current debate about off-shoring is dangerously hot. But the debate about work going to India, China and Mexico is actually no different from the debate once held about submarine work leaving new London or shoe work leaving Massachusetts or textile work leaving North Carolina. Work gets done where it can be done most effectively and efficiently. That ultimately helps the New Londons, New Bedfords and New Yorks of this world even more than it helps the Bangalores and Shenzhens. It helps because it frees up people and capital to do different, more sophisticated work, and it helps because it gives an opportunity to produce the end product more cheaply, benefiting customers even as it helps the corporation. It's certainly difficult for individuals to think about 'their' work going away, being done thousands of miles away by someone earning thousands of dollars less per year. But it's time to think about the opportunity as well as the pain, just as it's time to think about the obligations of off-shoring as well as the opportunities . . . Every person, just as every corporation, must tend to his or her own economic destiny, just as our parents and grandparents in the mills, shoe shops and factories did.
Since we are going to be reading Upton Sinclair's The Jungle in a week, this letter reminded me that our country has always faced economic upheavals and despair. I dare anyone to brave that novel and not come away with a sense of dread for Jurgis and his family and the system that chews them up and spits them up just as the meatpacking industry does to the livestock in consumes at a hellish pace. I think of this as outsourcing in reverse. The jobs in Packingtown of Chicago are so vile and dangerous that there are few Americans willing to do the work. So we import millions of people to do it for the lowest wages possible.
Sound familiar? The only difference is that today we take some of the least desirable jobs (telemarketing comes to mind), and we ship it off to India for people to do it for the lowest wages possible. The key difference here is that technology allows the people to stay in their own countries instead of braving the oceans to get here.
Outsourcing is just another bump in the road for the American worker. Now, I know it's callous as hell to refer to millions of workers being out of work as 'a bump in the road.' That is not my intention.
History proves that this has always happened. From an early age I remember Mom and Dad worrying about my father's employer, Stordahl Trucking, going under. It did. Dad, though, caught on with Hartz Trucking. He was able to adapt and move on with the market.
But millions of Americans are trapped and can't move on, or the jobs for which they were trained or educated have simply evaporated. That's where those who are able to will adapt; those who can't will suffer.
And it's a damn shame.
But that's the economic reality of the 21st century. Better be at your sharpest. For, as Alan Winder notes, we can expect in the next 30 years close to 40 millions jobs to be outsourced.
What can you do or go into for a career that won't be outsourced? Or what can you do or go into for a career that we will outsource jobs to America when India and China find it cheaper to do what America is doing now (and outsource jobs)? Maybe it will never come to that.
But the factory worker and laborer is a dying a breed. I'm not saying that they aren't talented and necessary. That's not it at all. Rather, the economic reality has changed. We don't need as many people to work on an assembly line as we used to. Machines can do the work more efficiently or we can outsource the whole damn plant to a third world country.
What I'm saying is that the workers of today need to be knowledge workers. They have to adapt like no other employees in our country's history. Gone are the days when you could intern at a company, sweeping floors and running errands and over the course of one's life - given a great work ethic and amount of sacrifice - one could work their way to the top.
That's not how our companies work anymore. You can strive and work and sacrifice all you want at Digi Key, but you'll never have the office next to the CEO's.
But you can go through training or earn degrees that make you flexible enough to adapt and benefit the company as it grows and changes.
I think of my brother. He has worked for the beat plant in Crookston all of his adult life. He began as a season laborer, but he soon saw that machines and computers would replace him. He got on full-time and took training courses (I remember him going to Colorado State one summer to take math and science classes) to move up. In other words, to make him more flexible to adapt to the changes in the company. He has been doing this routinely for the past 15 years. Now he is in management. That is how one adapts in the 21st century.
Otherwise, you get left behind.
Here are the ten fields that Thomas Friedman believes will be relevant in the flatworld (and likely to not be outsourced).
* The butcher, baker, and candlestick maker. Some jobs simply cannot be outsourced. Even Winder - the economist from Princeton - asks the question, will you be better off 10 years from now as a carpenter or accountant or lawyer? Many of the accounting and lawyering work will be outsourced. But you might still find a job building homes here (so much for knowledge workers then, right? Well, not so fast. Who is going to get more jobs - the handyman who puts up a home made sign along the side of the road (as I saw on the way to the cities last month) or the carpenter who develops a great website with examples of his or her work and testimonies from others?).
* Anything green. Go into science. This is the next revolution. You invent how to fix global warming or how to power a car on water or how to clean up the oceans or purify the air, and you'll be in business.
* Passionate Personalizers. Those people who just connect with their customers and ooze personality. Those who build relationships with their customers. Friedman talks about a guy who sells lemonade at one of the major league ballparks. It doesn't get much easier than lemonade, right? Anyone could do it. Hell, machines do this in most ballparks. But this guy sings, dances, jokes, and makes himself all part of the experience at the ball park. And Friedman noticed that at the end of each ballgame, this guy has a wad of cash in tips twice as thick as anyone else. You can't outsource personality and enthusiasm.
* Math lovers. Lord, how we love our data. And who is going to analyze all that data? Math lovers.
* Explainers. Here's where I come in - teachers and professors and those who can take something complex and (hopefully) simplify it and explain/teach it to others.
* Localizers. Small businesses. You need your groceries, supplies, insurance, and gasoline from your home town.
* Leverages (technology). This means those people who can use technology in their businesses or ways of life to adapt to the flat world. Friedman gives an example - while in Budapest at a conference, he met his chauffeur. The chauffeur asked Friedman if he'd mention his name to some of his friends if they were ever in town and needed someone to show him around. Friedman said sure, just give him his card. The chauffeur said he'd go one step further and gave Friedman his website. A chauffeur with a website. So when Friedman got home, he googled the website and was wowed by it. Not only did it have pictures and video, but it also had music and came in three languages. That's using technology to your advantage.
I also think of UPS vs. the Post Office. One is thriving because they use technology to handle internal logistics of large corporations (such as Digi Key) while the Post Office is struggling just to stay open on Saturdays (not to mention the monthly hike in stamps).
* Collaborators. Team work. Those who can take an idea and build on it. Think of the search engine, firefox. It was created by two kids who lived in two different countries and, in fact, never met. They just collaborated on line. And they were sick of Apple and Microsoft cornering the search engine market.
* Specialists. Those who are experts in their fields. Not just that, but also those who have opposing expertise's. When speaking at MIT on behalf of the New York Times, he said that they needed engineers in the worst way. But they need engineers who actually read the New York Times - or better yet- an engineer who reads at least three papers a day. The reason being that the Times could outsource their engineering needs in a split second if all they needed were designing done. But they want done what they can't imagine yet. Hence, they need an engineer who is an expert in journalism. That way she or he can take those two apparently opposite expertise's and mash them together to form something no one has ever thought of.
Exciting, isn't it?
Since we are going to be reading Upton Sinclair's The Jungle in a week, this letter reminded me that our country has always faced economic upheavals and despair. I dare anyone to brave that novel and not come away with a sense of dread for Jurgis and his family and the system that chews them up and spits them up just as the meatpacking industry does to the livestock in consumes at a hellish pace. I think of this as outsourcing in reverse. The jobs in Packingtown of Chicago are so vile and dangerous that there are few Americans willing to do the work. So we import millions of people to do it for the lowest wages possible.
Sound familiar? The only difference is that today we take some of the least desirable jobs (telemarketing comes to mind), and we ship it off to India for people to do it for the lowest wages possible. The key difference here is that technology allows the people to stay in their own countries instead of braving the oceans to get here.
Outsourcing is just another bump in the road for the American worker. Now, I know it's callous as hell to refer to millions of workers being out of work as 'a bump in the road.' That is not my intention.
History proves that this has always happened. From an early age I remember Mom and Dad worrying about my father's employer, Stordahl Trucking, going under. It did. Dad, though, caught on with Hartz Trucking. He was able to adapt and move on with the market.
But millions of Americans are trapped and can't move on, or the jobs for which they were trained or educated have simply evaporated. That's where those who are able to will adapt; those who can't will suffer.
And it's a damn shame.
But that's the economic reality of the 21st century. Better be at your sharpest. For, as Alan Winder notes, we can expect in the next 30 years close to 40 millions jobs to be outsourced.
What can you do or go into for a career that won't be outsourced? Or what can you do or go into for a career that we will outsource jobs to America when India and China find it cheaper to do what America is doing now (and outsource jobs)? Maybe it will never come to that.
But the factory worker and laborer is a dying a breed. I'm not saying that they aren't talented and necessary. That's not it at all. Rather, the economic reality has changed. We don't need as many people to work on an assembly line as we used to. Machines can do the work more efficiently or we can outsource the whole damn plant to a third world country.
What I'm saying is that the workers of today need to be knowledge workers. They have to adapt like no other employees in our country's history. Gone are the days when you could intern at a company, sweeping floors and running errands and over the course of one's life - given a great work ethic and amount of sacrifice - one could work their way to the top.
That's not how our companies work anymore. You can strive and work and sacrifice all you want at Digi Key, but you'll never have the office next to the CEO's.
But you can go through training or earn degrees that make you flexible enough to adapt and benefit the company as it grows and changes.
I think of my brother. He has worked for the beat plant in Crookston all of his adult life. He began as a season laborer, but he soon saw that machines and computers would replace him. He got on full-time and took training courses (I remember him going to Colorado State one summer to take math and science classes) to move up. In other words, to make him more flexible to adapt to the changes in the company. He has been doing this routinely for the past 15 years. Now he is in management. That is how one adapts in the 21st century.
Otherwise, you get left behind.
Here are the ten fields that Thomas Friedman believes will be relevant in the flatworld (and likely to not be outsourced).
* The butcher, baker, and candlestick maker. Some jobs simply cannot be outsourced. Even Winder - the economist from Princeton - asks the question, will you be better off 10 years from now as a carpenter or accountant or lawyer? Many of the accounting and lawyering work will be outsourced. But you might still find a job building homes here (so much for knowledge workers then, right? Well, not so fast. Who is going to get more jobs - the handyman who puts up a home made sign along the side of the road (as I saw on the way to the cities last month) or the carpenter who develops a great website with examples of his or her work and testimonies from others?).
* Anything green. Go into science. This is the next revolution. You invent how to fix global warming or how to power a car on water or how to clean up the oceans or purify the air, and you'll be in business.
* Passionate Personalizers. Those people who just connect with their customers and ooze personality. Those who build relationships with their customers. Friedman talks about a guy who sells lemonade at one of the major league ballparks. It doesn't get much easier than lemonade, right? Anyone could do it. Hell, machines do this in most ballparks. But this guy sings, dances, jokes, and makes himself all part of the experience at the ball park. And Friedman noticed that at the end of each ballgame, this guy has a wad of cash in tips twice as thick as anyone else. You can't outsource personality and enthusiasm.
* Math lovers. Lord, how we love our data. And who is going to analyze all that data? Math lovers.
* Explainers. Here's where I come in - teachers and professors and those who can take something complex and (hopefully) simplify it and explain/teach it to others.
* Localizers. Small businesses. You need your groceries, supplies, insurance, and gasoline from your home town.
* Leverages (technology). This means those people who can use technology in their businesses or ways of life to adapt to the flat world. Friedman gives an example - while in Budapest at a conference, he met his chauffeur. The chauffeur asked Friedman if he'd mention his name to some of his friends if they were ever in town and needed someone to show him around. Friedman said sure, just give him his card. The chauffeur said he'd go one step further and gave Friedman his website. A chauffeur with a website. So when Friedman got home, he googled the website and was wowed by it. Not only did it have pictures and video, but it also had music and came in three languages. That's using technology to your advantage.
I also think of UPS vs. the Post Office. One is thriving because they use technology to handle internal logistics of large corporations (such as Digi Key) while the Post Office is struggling just to stay open on Saturdays (not to mention the monthly hike in stamps).
* Collaborators. Team work. Those who can take an idea and build on it. Think of the search engine, firefox. It was created by two kids who lived in two different countries and, in fact, never met. They just collaborated on line. And they were sick of Apple and Microsoft cornering the search engine market.
* Specialists. Those who are experts in their fields. Not just that, but also those who have opposing expertise's. When speaking at MIT on behalf of the New York Times, he said that they needed engineers in the worst way. But they need engineers who actually read the New York Times - or better yet- an engineer who reads at least three papers a day. The reason being that the Times could outsource their engineering needs in a split second if all they needed were designing done. But they want done what they can't imagine yet. Hence, they need an engineer who is an expert in journalism. That way she or he can take those two apparently opposite expertise's and mash them together to form something no one has ever thought of.
Exciting, isn't it?
Fahrenheit 451 indeed
Check this out. I thought all the money grubbing televangelists died out in the '80's. I guess they (and their plights) just went to the internet.
Poor Stephen Baldwin. When he chose to walk a higher path, his income dropped by 70%, but if you donate YOUR hard earned cash, he can get it all back. The reason being he needs to build his wealth up so he can convert the powerful and rich of Hollywood.
Poor, Mr. Baldwin. What shall he ever do?
Thanks to countryscribe for this link.
Poor Stephen Baldwin. When he chose to walk a higher path, his income dropped by 70%, but if you donate YOUR hard earned cash, he can get it all back. The reason being he needs to build his wealth up so he can convert the powerful and rich of Hollywood.
Poor, Mr. Baldwin. What shall he ever do?
Thanks to countryscribe for this link.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Now this is cool
Thanks to the blog speed of creativity, I came across these Lego stop motion scenes from films and videos.
This week in my Lit & Lang 11 class, we will create iMovie trailers for Fahrenheit 451. I usually do this with the Edgar Allan Poe short story unit, but I ran short on time. So we'll try this instead.
The next step will be, though, to see if I have any students adventurous enough to try something like this.
Here are a few of my favorites from the people at brickfilms.
From Jaws -
From The Matrix -
Indiana Jones -
This week in my Lit & Lang 11 class, we will create iMovie trailers for Fahrenheit 451. I usually do this with the Edgar Allan Poe short story unit, but I ran short on time. So we'll try this instead.
The next step will be, though, to see if I have any students adventurous enough to try something like this.
Here are a few of my favorites from the people at brickfilms.
From Jaws -
From The Matrix -
Indiana Jones -
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Drill baby drill
This is but one of many reasons I was disappointed when Obama decided to push ahead with more offshore drilling.
Maybe I'm brainwashed by Thomas Friedman, but there has got to be a solution out there to this fossil fuel problem.
Call me a tree hugger or what, but there's got to be a cleaner and healthier way to fuel our planet - or we aren't going to have much to leave behind to our kids.
China and India are adding billions of people who want to live just like Americans - consume, consume, consume.
God's green earth - I fear - was not designed for that many Americans consuming the planet to ruin.
Now, call me crazy but you're telling me we can't get all the energy we'd ever need from this big fella???
Friedman makes a good point - we don't have a 'green revolution' going on in this country. We have a 'green party.' Friedman points out - how many revolutions do you know where no one gets hurt?
There is a serious problem - if not concerning the environment (if global warming is just part of a natural warming cycle), then concerning our economy - that we can't just drill our way out of.
He advocates a turning 'green' as in energy technology into the new red, white, and blue. If we solve the climate crisis and fossil fuel crisis with our scientists and engineers, then we can own the next century. We can sell all of the cost effective and fuel efficient machinery to China and India and remain the world economic leader.
But before that can happen, someone has to get hurt. It certainly has to be the huge oil companies. It will have to be the buyers (how happy I'd be to fill up for ten dollars a gallon knowing that price - for however many years it would take - would cause the government to get serious about finding real efficient technology and fuels).
And don't think it can happen. If America can pride itself on anything, it can be proud of its ingenuity and inventiveness. As Friedman states, if the market was set to favor venture capitalists to invest is various types of future fuels, then you'd get 5,000 new ideas. That would result in a 1,000 serious contenders. Those contenders might lead to four or five revolutionary green energy sources.
Friedman states that he meets people wherever he goes who say, "I've been working on this idea in my basement or garage . . ." and they show him their inventions. If they had some serious venture capitalists investing funds in them, who knows what we'd get?
And don't doubt this. After all, didn't jobs build Apple computers in his garage? Didn't Gates do the same? Didn't Stordahl sell parts out of his car? Yet, look at the multi-billion dollar companies that have helped change our every day lives.
And don't doubt that the world can change quickly. Here's an example. Twelve years ago when I started teaching at Lincoln, there was one phone for students to use. And I always had kids going to the bathroom or their lockers and routinely swinging down by the old gym to use the phone. Other than that, the offices were the only places to have phones.
Then a few years later, each room got a phone.
And for the past six years or so, those are obsolete because nearly every single student and nearly every single teacher has a cell phone.
I went from cracking down on kids passing notes to cracking down on kids and their cell phones.
And it isn't just talking on the cell phones. They hardly even do that. It's all texting. Or surfing the net or taking pictures. Just look at how 'smart phones' have revolutionized the cell phone industry in the past five years.
But there is a huge demand for this and look at how the companies have worked to meet that demand.
The green or smart fuel industry could - and would - work the same way. If the market was shaped by the government and some people were to get hurt. But we would be leaving our kids a better world. No doubt about that.
Maybe I'm brainwashed by Thomas Friedman, but there has got to be a solution out there to this fossil fuel problem.
Call me a tree hugger or what, but there's got to be a cleaner and healthier way to fuel our planet - or we aren't going to have much to leave behind to our kids.
China and India are adding billions of people who want to live just like Americans - consume, consume, consume.
God's green earth - I fear - was not designed for that many Americans consuming the planet to ruin.
Now, call me crazy but you're telling me we can't get all the energy we'd ever need from this big fella???
Friedman makes a good point - we don't have a 'green revolution' going on in this country. We have a 'green party.' Friedman points out - how many revolutions do you know where no one gets hurt?
There is a serious problem - if not concerning the environment (if global warming is just part of a natural warming cycle), then concerning our economy - that we can't just drill our way out of.
He advocates a turning 'green' as in energy technology into the new red, white, and blue. If we solve the climate crisis and fossil fuel crisis with our scientists and engineers, then we can own the next century. We can sell all of the cost effective and fuel efficient machinery to China and India and remain the world economic leader.
But before that can happen, someone has to get hurt. It certainly has to be the huge oil companies. It will have to be the buyers (how happy I'd be to fill up for ten dollars a gallon knowing that price - for however many years it would take - would cause the government to get serious about finding real efficient technology and fuels).
And don't think it can happen. If America can pride itself on anything, it can be proud of its ingenuity and inventiveness. As Friedman states, if the market was set to favor venture capitalists to invest is various types of future fuels, then you'd get 5,000 new ideas. That would result in a 1,000 serious contenders. Those contenders might lead to four or five revolutionary green energy sources.
Friedman states that he meets people wherever he goes who say, "I've been working on this idea in my basement or garage . . ." and they show him their inventions. If they had some serious venture capitalists investing funds in them, who knows what we'd get?
And don't doubt this. After all, didn't jobs build Apple computers in his garage? Didn't Gates do the same? Didn't Stordahl sell parts out of his car? Yet, look at the multi-billion dollar companies that have helped change our every day lives.
And don't doubt that the world can change quickly. Here's an example. Twelve years ago when I started teaching at Lincoln, there was one phone for students to use. And I always had kids going to the bathroom or their lockers and routinely swinging down by the old gym to use the phone. Other than that, the offices were the only places to have phones.
Then a few years later, each room got a phone.
And for the past six years or so, those are obsolete because nearly every single student and nearly every single teacher has a cell phone.
I went from cracking down on kids passing notes to cracking down on kids and their cell phones.
And it isn't just talking on the cell phones. They hardly even do that. It's all texting. Or surfing the net or taking pictures. Just look at how 'smart phones' have revolutionized the cell phone industry in the past five years.
But there is a huge demand for this and look at how the companies have worked to meet that demand.
The green or smart fuel industry could - and would - work the same way. If the market was shaped by the government and some people were to get hurt. But we would be leaving our kids a better world. No doubt about that.
Feels like a "B"
That's what I give the Bengals for the 2010 draft.
The 2009 draft got them back to the land of the living in the NFL. Now if they can just build on last year's success (Ray Maluaga, Michael Johnson, Bernard Scott, Morgan Trent).
The picks who I think will contribute right away -
Jermaine Gresham. The TE position is his to lose. He is the best threat we've had there since Rodney Holman in the '80's.
Carlos Dunlap. It was impossible not to notice this kid in Florida's games. Any guy who is 6'6" with his long arms and wingspan is just built to get after quarterbacks. He was inconsistent in college. But that is what Mike Zimmer does best as the Bengals defensive coordinator: he puts players in the best position possible to maximize their talent.
Jordan Shipley. This kid will be the third receiver on opening day. He might just be my favorite pick of their entire draft.
Geno Atkins. DT. Peko and Tank Johnson and Pat Sims helped the Bengals rank in the top five against the run. Atkins can help spell them.
The Bengals don't often get enough credit for their drafts. And some of that's justified because they've had some serious clunkers in the past (Akili Smith, Peter Warrick, Ka-Jana Carter, Reinard Wilson), but they've also found a lot of talent (Corey Dillon, Ochocinco, Darnay Scott, Carl Pickens, Justin Smith, Takeo Spikes).
Part of the problem surely is their past misfires and their losing records (thank you Mike Brown). But part of it is too that they rarely trade or move up. They just sit there and take the players that fall to them.
That's not sexy in the NFL. If they packaged picks and players and moved all over the place, Mel Kiper and the legions of critics would praise their work. But that doesn't always work. Jerry Jones crippled the Cowboys for years by thinking he was Jimmy Johnson and moving out of the first round and stock piling mid round picks. And it's no wonder they hadn't won a playoff game (until this year) since. The Eagles are another team who moves around a lot, but their drafts have been quite poor. Look at some of their first round and second round picks and you'll say, "Who?" For every Deshaun Jackson or Bryan Westbrook, there's a Freddie Mitchell, Ryan Moats, Trevor Laws, Winston Justice, and Matt McCoy. Not exactly household names. But the Eagles get a pass on this ineptitude for some reason.
Another team that has been worse at drafting than the Bengals is the New York Jets, yet they never seem to get made fun of the way the Bengals do. The Bengals get ridiculed for a minuscule scout department (Mike Brown is cheap and he asks his assistant coaches to do a lot of the scouting). The Jets have one of the largest scouting departments.
But line up any draft of the past 20 years, and the Jets will do no better than the Bengals. Yet, they get a pass on their failures too.
Another joke is the Patriots. If it weren't for free agency, the Pats would never have reached the success they did (Moss, Junior Seau, Mike Vrabel, Corey Dillon, Rodney Harrison . . .). And if you look closely at their drafts, they easily miss on just as many picks as they hit on.
Sure they nabbed Brady in the sixth round. And they've drafted very well when it comes to defensive linemen and offensive linemen. But when was the last time they hit it out of the park when it came to a running back or receiver or linebacker? Here's some name for you. Tell me how many Pro Bowls these guys have racked up - Chad Jackson (second round wide receiver), Dave Thomas (third round tight end), Marquise Hill (second round defensive end), Guss Scott (third round defensive back), Bethel Johnson (second round wide receiver), Jarvis Green (fourth round defensive end), Brock Williams (third round defensive back).
Now I know you will say that they gained a lot of picks and moved around to get the players they wanted. You miss on a lot but you also hit on a few (and it's undeniable that the Pats certainly hit on a few of their picks). But no one brings up the gaffes they made.
If it weren't for superior coaching and astute free agency, these drafts would be laughed at for the total number of quality starters they've yielded for the amount of picks spent.
Here's hoping the Bengals have reversed their fortunes when it comes to this.
Their best draft - 2001 - never gets enough credit. But how many teams can boast hitting on four Pro Bowl players? Justin Smith DE - first round (made the Pro Bowl this year - albeit for the 49ers). Chad Ochocinco WR - second round (a perennial Pro Bowler). Rudi Johnson RB - fourth round (a Pro Bowler in '05). Tj Houshmandzadeh (a Pro Bowler in '07). Not bad for production? And that draft was vital in getting them the division championship in 2005.
If they wouldn't have been snake bitten by the 2005 draft (David Pollack (out of the NFL after breaking his neck), Odell Thurman (out of the NFL after alcohol problems and a league suspension), Chris Henry (dead after finally getting his act together), Tab Perry (out of the NFL after suffering a hip injury). The only one left contributing is the seventh rounder Jonathan Fanene, who had a career year this year. But had any of those guys lived up to their potential, the Bengals would be a far different team.
The Bengals rebounded, though, with the 2006 draft, nabbing what could be three Pro Bowlers. Jonathan Joseph (first round corner back) who played as well as any defensive back in the AFC not named Derrelle Revis. Andrew Whitworth (second round offensive tackle) who shut out every pass rusher in the AFC North and Jared Allen of the NFC North this year. And finally Domato Peko (fourth round defensive tackle) who was the best run stuffing tackle in the AFC this year. If they Bengals win the AFC North again, pencil these three in to the Pro Bowl.
Add those guys to the crop from last year's draft, and the Bengals could be building something special.
The 2009 draft got them back to the land of the living in the NFL. Now if they can just build on last year's success (Ray Maluaga, Michael Johnson, Bernard Scott, Morgan Trent).
The picks who I think will contribute right away -
Jermaine Gresham. The TE position is his to lose. He is the best threat we've had there since Rodney Holman in the '80's.
Carlos Dunlap. It was impossible not to notice this kid in Florida's games. Any guy who is 6'6" with his long arms and wingspan is just built to get after quarterbacks. He was inconsistent in college. But that is what Mike Zimmer does best as the Bengals defensive coordinator: he puts players in the best position possible to maximize their talent.
Jordan Shipley. This kid will be the third receiver on opening day. He might just be my favorite pick of their entire draft.
Geno Atkins. DT. Peko and Tank Johnson and Pat Sims helped the Bengals rank in the top five against the run. Atkins can help spell them.
The Bengals don't often get enough credit for their drafts. And some of that's justified because they've had some serious clunkers in the past (Akili Smith, Peter Warrick, Ka-Jana Carter, Reinard Wilson), but they've also found a lot of talent (Corey Dillon, Ochocinco, Darnay Scott, Carl Pickens, Justin Smith, Takeo Spikes).
Part of the problem surely is their past misfires and their losing records (thank you Mike Brown). But part of it is too that they rarely trade or move up. They just sit there and take the players that fall to them.
That's not sexy in the NFL. If they packaged picks and players and moved all over the place, Mel Kiper and the legions of critics would praise their work. But that doesn't always work. Jerry Jones crippled the Cowboys for years by thinking he was Jimmy Johnson and moving out of the first round and stock piling mid round picks. And it's no wonder they hadn't won a playoff game (until this year) since. The Eagles are another team who moves around a lot, but their drafts have been quite poor. Look at some of their first round and second round picks and you'll say, "Who?" For every Deshaun Jackson or Bryan Westbrook, there's a Freddie Mitchell, Ryan Moats, Trevor Laws, Winston Justice, and Matt McCoy. Not exactly household names. But the Eagles get a pass on this ineptitude for some reason.
Another team that has been worse at drafting than the Bengals is the New York Jets, yet they never seem to get made fun of the way the Bengals do. The Bengals get ridiculed for a minuscule scout department (Mike Brown is cheap and he asks his assistant coaches to do a lot of the scouting). The Jets have one of the largest scouting departments.
But line up any draft of the past 20 years, and the Jets will do no better than the Bengals. Yet, they get a pass on their failures too.
Another joke is the Patriots. If it weren't for free agency, the Pats would never have reached the success they did (Moss, Junior Seau, Mike Vrabel, Corey Dillon, Rodney Harrison . . .). And if you look closely at their drafts, they easily miss on just as many picks as they hit on.
Sure they nabbed Brady in the sixth round. And they've drafted very well when it comes to defensive linemen and offensive linemen. But when was the last time they hit it out of the park when it came to a running back or receiver or linebacker? Here's some name for you. Tell me how many Pro Bowls these guys have racked up - Chad Jackson (second round wide receiver), Dave Thomas (third round tight end), Marquise Hill (second round defensive end), Guss Scott (third round defensive back), Bethel Johnson (second round wide receiver), Jarvis Green (fourth round defensive end), Brock Williams (third round defensive back).
Now I know you will say that they gained a lot of picks and moved around to get the players they wanted. You miss on a lot but you also hit on a few (and it's undeniable that the Pats certainly hit on a few of their picks). But no one brings up the gaffes they made.
If it weren't for superior coaching and astute free agency, these drafts would be laughed at for the total number of quality starters they've yielded for the amount of picks spent.
Here's hoping the Bengals have reversed their fortunes when it comes to this.
Their best draft - 2001 - never gets enough credit. But how many teams can boast hitting on four Pro Bowl players? Justin Smith DE - first round (made the Pro Bowl this year - albeit for the 49ers). Chad Ochocinco WR - second round (a perennial Pro Bowler). Rudi Johnson RB - fourth round (a Pro Bowler in '05). Tj Houshmandzadeh (a Pro Bowler in '07). Not bad for production? And that draft was vital in getting them the division championship in 2005.
If they wouldn't have been snake bitten by the 2005 draft (David Pollack (out of the NFL after breaking his neck), Odell Thurman (out of the NFL after alcohol problems and a league suspension), Chris Henry (dead after finally getting his act together), Tab Perry (out of the NFL after suffering a hip injury). The only one left contributing is the seventh rounder Jonathan Fanene, who had a career year this year. But had any of those guys lived up to their potential, the Bengals would be a far different team.
The Bengals rebounded, though, with the 2006 draft, nabbing what could be three Pro Bowlers. Jonathan Joseph (first round corner back) who played as well as any defensive back in the AFC not named Derrelle Revis. Andrew Whitworth (second round offensive tackle) who shut out every pass rusher in the AFC North and Jared Allen of the NFC North this year. And finally Domato Peko (fourth round defensive tackle) who was the best run stuffing tackle in the AFC this year. If they Bengals win the AFC North again, pencil these three in to the Pro Bowl.
Add those guys to the crop from last year's draft, and the Bengals could be building something special.
Some of my favorite picks
Here are some of my favorite picks from the past three days --
Tim Tebow to Denver. This one surprises even me. I hated Tebow in college. But when I watched how Gruden worked with him on the NFL Network, I was so surprised by how coachable he was and how much he wanted to learn and improve. Had he lasted until the second round, I'd have loved to have seen the Bengals take a flyer on him.
Toby Gerhart to Minnesota. This one also is a surprise. Gerhart is a stud. Kind of the second coming of Rick Finney. Only better. My only question is that if he's going to replace Chester Taylor, who did a phenomenal job catching the ball, Gerhart is not really the best option. He seems to me to be the kind of player who needs the ball 25 times - like a true tailback. But the Vikes have AP. And as much as I hate him (for being so good) and love him (for fumbling at key moments), I think if they're looking for a threat catching and on third down, Joe McKnight might have been the better option. Or they could have stayed with their first round pick and grabbed Jahvid Best out of Cal.
Brian Price - Tampa Bay. This guy is going to be the new Warren Sapp. He is a fireplug who never quits and will be great. Excellent value at the top of the second round.
Jordan Shipley - Cincinnati. I'm a bit biased here, but this guy is the second coming of TJ. He's the perfect slot receiver. He's quicker than you think, and if you ever watched a Texas game, he was a playmaker.
Armanti Edwards - Carolina. He played QB at Appalachian State. He led them to the biggest upset in college football history three years ago when they upset Michigan. This kid likely won't play quarterback for the Panthers, but he's too talented not to get on the field somehow.
Darryl Sharpton - Houston. I was really hoping he'd slip to the Bengals in the fourth round. This kid plays lights out. And how can you not like a linebacker from Miami? The league is full of them and they are usually productive.
Dexter McCluster - KC. I had never heard of him before. But I was watching an early season game where Ole Miss (who was far overrated heading into the season) was behind and trying to get back in the game (I think South Carolina was beating them). The only playmaker they had was this kid, who looked light a Smurf out there he was so small, but when he had the ball, he could flat out fly and make people miss. The Chiefs had not had that since Dante Hall's prime.
Jonathan Dwyer - Pittsburgh. This kid is a newer version of The Bus. He was supposed to go in the first or even second round according to the mock magazines I bought, but they were way off. He didn't go until the sixth round. It's too bad too because he could have returned to Georgia Tech for his senior year. But when he was a glorified fullback who just ran dive plays, well, then you don't get a chance to show the NFL what you can do. He did poorly at the Combine too. But you can find running backs anywhere (look at Terrel Davis or Rudi Johnson), so he could very well put up some big numbers if the Steelers look to get serious about being a smash mouth team again.
Myron Rolle - Tennessee. My favorite player in the draft. The kid was a stud at FSU and has great bloodlines. Plus, he chose to skip his senior year and work as a Rhodes Scholar. You know you're getting an athlete who is also brilliant (he wants to be a neurosurgeon). I was really hoping the Bengals would draft him on day 3.
Tim Tebow to Denver. This one surprises even me. I hated Tebow in college. But when I watched how Gruden worked with him on the NFL Network, I was so surprised by how coachable he was and how much he wanted to learn and improve. Had he lasted until the second round, I'd have loved to have seen the Bengals take a flyer on him.
Toby Gerhart to Minnesota. This one also is a surprise. Gerhart is a stud. Kind of the second coming of Rick Finney. Only better. My only question is that if he's going to replace Chester Taylor, who did a phenomenal job catching the ball, Gerhart is not really the best option. He seems to me to be the kind of player who needs the ball 25 times - like a true tailback. But the Vikes have AP. And as much as I hate him (for being so good) and love him (for fumbling at key moments), I think if they're looking for a threat catching and on third down, Joe McKnight might have been the better option. Or they could have stayed with their first round pick and grabbed Jahvid Best out of Cal.
Brian Price - Tampa Bay. This guy is going to be the new Warren Sapp. He is a fireplug who never quits and will be great. Excellent value at the top of the second round.
Jordan Shipley - Cincinnati. I'm a bit biased here, but this guy is the second coming of TJ. He's the perfect slot receiver. He's quicker than you think, and if you ever watched a Texas game, he was a playmaker.
Armanti Edwards - Carolina. He played QB at Appalachian State. He led them to the biggest upset in college football history three years ago when they upset Michigan. This kid likely won't play quarterback for the Panthers, but he's too talented not to get on the field somehow.
Darryl Sharpton - Houston. I was really hoping he'd slip to the Bengals in the fourth round. This kid plays lights out. And how can you not like a linebacker from Miami? The league is full of them and they are usually productive.
Dexter McCluster - KC. I had never heard of him before. But I was watching an early season game where Ole Miss (who was far overrated heading into the season) was behind and trying to get back in the game (I think South Carolina was beating them). The only playmaker they had was this kid, who looked light a Smurf out there he was so small, but when he had the ball, he could flat out fly and make people miss. The Chiefs had not had that since Dante Hall's prime.
Jonathan Dwyer - Pittsburgh. This kid is a newer version of The Bus. He was supposed to go in the first or even second round according to the mock magazines I bought, but they were way off. He didn't go until the sixth round. It's too bad too because he could have returned to Georgia Tech for his senior year. But when he was a glorified fullback who just ran dive plays, well, then you don't get a chance to show the NFL what you can do. He did poorly at the Combine too. But you can find running backs anywhere (look at Terrel Davis or Rudi Johnson), so he could very well put up some big numbers if the Steelers look to get serious about being a smash mouth team again.
Myron Rolle - Tennessee. My favorite player in the draft. The kid was a stud at FSU and has great bloodlines. Plus, he chose to skip his senior year and work as a Rhodes Scholar. You know you're getting an athlete who is also brilliant (he wants to be a neurosurgeon). I was really hoping the Bengals would draft him on day 3.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Bengals 2010 draft
I'm not sure how I like the new format with the first round being in prime time on Thursday night. That's followed by the second and third rounds on Friday night.
It just seems like there's too much extra time for people to dissect every little move. Do we really need a total of 80 hours of draft coverage?
ESPN's crew was particularly out of sync. Do they really need five commentators on one panel? Mel Kiper Jr is a must. Tom Jackson is a standard. Boomer is essential. John Gruden was better than I ever expected. But Steve Young? He was as bad as Joe Theisman. Young never knew when to shut up and let anyone else talk.
During the first round Tom Jackson, Gruden, and Mel were visibly disturbed by Young's blathering.
Now for how the Bengals did.
Though they have a need to develop a young wide receiver, they passed on the top rated receiver in the draft, Dez Bryant, and opted instead for the top rated tight end in the draft, Jermaine Gresham.
I like the pick. Marvin is dedicated to running the ball in the AFC North. They have Ocho and Antonio Bryant. They may tab a receiver in the third round (I'm hoping for Mardy Gilyard). But this fast and physical tight end will really make play action more of a threat off the run game and should allow Carson to attack the middle of the field.
They took a bit of a chance in the second round with the underachiever Carlos Dunlap, a defensive end out of Florida. The guy is huge - 6'6" and 270, but he didn't dominate the way he should have.
But next to tight end, we needed to generate sacks. The Bengals can stop the run, but getting after the quarterback is essential.
Marvin and our awesome defensive coordinator, Mike Zimmer, will motivate this kid and get the most out of him.
The Bengals have two picks in the third round. I'm hoping for Gilyard at WR and Brandon Spikes at ILB. Or Chad Jones at SS.
The Steelers are going to struggle with Big Ben being suspended and trying to find their identity.
The Browns will be better, but that means they might be 8-8.
The Ravens, though, are really rebuilding their defense. Sergio Kindle was a steal in the second round, though he has knee issues. And Terrence Cody in the second round is literally a mountain of a man (370 pounds) who will plug anything in the middle next to Baltimore's excellent defensive tackle Holi Nata. Plus, factor in their trade for Anquan Bolden, and they'll be formidable.
It just seems like there's too much extra time for people to dissect every little move. Do we really need a total of 80 hours of draft coverage?
ESPN's crew was particularly out of sync. Do they really need five commentators on one panel? Mel Kiper Jr is a must. Tom Jackson is a standard. Boomer is essential. John Gruden was better than I ever expected. But Steve Young? He was as bad as Joe Theisman. Young never knew when to shut up and let anyone else talk.
During the first round Tom Jackson, Gruden, and Mel were visibly disturbed by Young's blathering.
Now for how the Bengals did.
Though they have a need to develop a young wide receiver, they passed on the top rated receiver in the draft, Dez Bryant, and opted instead for the top rated tight end in the draft, Jermaine Gresham.
I like the pick. Marvin is dedicated to running the ball in the AFC North. They have Ocho and Antonio Bryant. They may tab a receiver in the third round (I'm hoping for Mardy Gilyard). But this fast and physical tight end will really make play action more of a threat off the run game and should allow Carson to attack the middle of the field.
They took a bit of a chance in the second round with the underachiever Carlos Dunlap, a defensive end out of Florida. The guy is huge - 6'6" and 270, but he didn't dominate the way he should have.
But next to tight end, we needed to generate sacks. The Bengals can stop the run, but getting after the quarterback is essential.
Marvin and our awesome defensive coordinator, Mike Zimmer, will motivate this kid and get the most out of him.
The Bengals have two picks in the third round. I'm hoping for Gilyard at WR and Brandon Spikes at ILB. Or Chad Jones at SS.
The Steelers are going to struggle with Big Ben being suspended and trying to find their identity.
The Browns will be better, but that means they might be 8-8.
The Ravens, though, are really rebuilding their defense. Sergio Kindle was a steal in the second round, though he has knee issues. And Terrence Cody in the second round is literally a mountain of a man (370 pounds) who will plug anything in the middle next to Baltimore's excellent defensive tackle Holi Nata. Plus, factor in their trade for Anquan Bolden, and they'll be formidable.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Best Day of the Year
The Draft!!!!!
Well, the first round anyway.
Here is how it's going to go --
1. St. Louis - Sam Bradford (QB). The Rams have been bad for a looooong time. What’s the easiest way to turn a terrible franchise around? Get a franchise quarterback.
2. Detroit - Ndamukong Suh (DT). The Lions got their franchise quarterback (or so they pray) last year. So this year they get the best player in this year’s entire draft. Suh could be great. And given that defensive tackle and offensive tackle are rather ‘safe’ high picks, this should be a no-brainer for the Lions.
3. Tampa Bay - Gerald McCoy (DT). Arguably the second best player in the draft. The Bucs - who show some signs of live on offense - will get the second coming of Warren Sapp with McCoy.
4. Washington Redskins - Russell Okung (OT). You just never know with the Redskins, especially with Mike Shannahan as coach. If they dump Haynesworth, and if one of those tackles falls, they’ll snatch him up. But really the ‘Skins have never recovered from losing Chirs Samuels and Jon Janson as their tackles.
5. Kansas City - Eric Berry (S). This kid was dominant. When he smoked Tebow in midseason, I thought he killed him. Berry hits like a linebacker and can cover like a corner. The Chiefs defense has holes galore, and this will help fill one. Their offense has potential. Time to shore up the other side of the ball.
6.Seattle Seahawks - CJ Spiller (RB). This is a bit of a surprise, but if you saw Spiller play in college (off the top of my head I think of the two Georgia Tech games and the game against Florida State), you saw a man who could score a TD any time he touched the ball. That’s a playmaker, and that’s what Seattle’s offense sorely needs.
7. Cleveland Browns - Derrick Morgan (DE). The Browns could go quarterback, but Holmgren likes to develop them. That means he usually brings in the guys he wants from former teams (like what he did with Senaca Wallace). And the Browns haven’t done much with recent quarterbacks (Derek Anderson and former first rounder Brady Quin). Morgan can rush the passer and the Browns don’t have much in that department after whiffing on Kamerion Wimley.
8. Da Raiders - Jimmy Clausen (QB). Surprise. But isn’t the Raiders’ pick always a surprise? Jarmarcus Russell is still a question mark. Next to speed, Al Davis loves strong armed quarterbacks.
9. Buffalo Bills - Dan Williams (DT). The draft is rich in defensive tackles. The Bills get a plugger here to help their defense.
10. Jacksonville Jaguars (DE). Jason Pierre-Paul. The Jags have missed on some pass rushing threats in recent drafts and need to get better there. Pierre-Paul is a one year wonder out of South Florida, but his upside is huge. Could be the next Julius Peppers.
11. Denver Broncos - Dez Bryant (WR). Some see Bryant falling farther than this, but I don’t. He’s too talented and Denver lacks talent at the WR spot. Sure their defense let them limp to a 9-7 record (after a 6-0 start) in one of the worst collapses in NFL history. But it’s not like they generated a lot of points down the stretch either.
12. Miami Dolphins - Bryan Bulaga (OT). The Fins have shored up some troubles through free agency and trades. I see them taking an offensive lineman here to help keep their QB (whoever that turns out to be) upright and to help maintain the Parcells’ ground game.
13. San Francisco - Joe Haden (CB). Their offense played better the last half of the season (remember when the manhandled the Cards at home?) when Alex Smith got on the field. Singletary is a defensive guy, and he goes for the best corner in the draft.
14. Seattle Seahawks - Earl Thomas (S). They went offense with their first pick. Now it’s time for one of the best playmakers in the draft. Thomas could even play corner.
15. New York Giants - Roland McClain (ILB). The Giants defense was atrocious last year. McClain will help bring a new mentality to the middle of that defense.
16. Tennessee Titans - Trent Williams (OT). They too need defense, but the second best tackle is sitting there on the board for them. Offensive tackle is the safest pick to take in the first round and the Titans grab a good one here.
17. San Francisco - Brian Price (DT). I know this is a bit high for him, and the Niners could well trade out of this spot, but Price is from UCLA and is a human fireplug in the defensive line.
18. Pittsburgh - Mike Iupati (G). Pitt loves to draft guards in the first round (Allan Faneca). Though who knows if they’ll ship Big Ben and WR is a need after giving away Santonio Holmes. But the Steelers know they’ll be without Big Ben for at least four games. So they’ll likely have an inexperienced QB. What’s the best way to solve that problem? Get a great line together and pound the football.
19. Atlanta Falcons - Anthony Davis (OT). The Falcons get another falling OT who is a great value here.
20. Houston Texans - Brandon Graham (OLB/DE). The Texans need help on defense. Could you imagine Mario Williams on one side and Graham on the other?
21. Cincinnati Bengals - Jermaine Gresham (TE). I’d like to see them trade down. There isn’t a huge, glaring need on the Bengals (finally). If there was a higher rated DT or DE available, I could see them going that way. The other pick could be Taylor Mays. Either way they’ve only drafted one TE and one S in the first round in their history. But, then again, they had never drafted a CB in the firs round, and Lewis did that two years in a row to nab our starting corners. Gresham would be a sorely needed weapon for Carson.
22. New England Patriots - Sean Weatherspoon (OLB). The pats need help on their linebacking corps since they got so old there so quickly.
23. Green Bay Packers -Patrick Robinson (CB). Offensive line is a need, but they’ll grab one in the next round. The Packers love their man-to-man and Al Harris and Charles Woodson aren’t getting any younger. Robinson comes from FSU where it’s all man-to-man and he’d be a good fit for the NFC North.
24. Philadelphia Eagles - Marukice Pouncey (C/G). They just released some lineman and traded McNabb. It’s Kolb’s turn and they better protect him. Pouncey is a great value here.
25. Baltimore Ravens - Taylor Mays (S). Ed Reed is old. Mays could be the center fielder they need.
26. Arizona Cardinals - Demaryius Thomas (WR). They lost Bolden, so they take his younger self here. Thomas is a monster. He needs some work, but they can afford to ease him in to their offense.
27. Dallas Cowboys - Sergio Kindle (OLB). The Texas product doesn’t have to move. The Cowboys could use some youth in this group judging from how MN lit them up in the playoffs. And they get the best defensive player available.
28. San Diego Chargers - Carlos Dunlap (DE). This kid is a monster. He could go here or the third round. He has the long arms and quick feet a pass rusher needs.
29. New York Jets - Toby Gerhart (RB). I love this pick. The Jets lost Thomas Jones. They have a young stud runner in Shon Greene, but they need another big back. Gerhart is just that. Anyone who watched this kid play knows he’s the real deal and not just another Touchdown Tommy Vardell. If Rex Ryan were to design an offensive player - this could would be it.
30. Minnesota Vikings - Tim Tebow (QB). I know. Shock the world. But I've got a feeling about this one. Favre isn't getting any younger. And after watching Gruden work with him, I'm hoping he lasts until the second or third round where the Bengals might take a flyer on him.
Well, the first round anyway.
Here is how it's going to go --
1. St. Louis - Sam Bradford (QB). The Rams have been bad for a looooong time. What’s the easiest way to turn a terrible franchise around? Get a franchise quarterback.
2. Detroit - Ndamukong Suh (DT). The Lions got their franchise quarterback (or so they pray) last year. So this year they get the best player in this year’s entire draft. Suh could be great. And given that defensive tackle and offensive tackle are rather ‘safe’ high picks, this should be a no-brainer for the Lions.
3. Tampa Bay - Gerald McCoy (DT). Arguably the second best player in the draft. The Bucs - who show some signs of live on offense - will get the second coming of Warren Sapp with McCoy.
4. Washington Redskins - Russell Okung (OT). You just never know with the Redskins, especially with Mike Shannahan as coach. If they dump Haynesworth, and if one of those tackles falls, they’ll snatch him up. But really the ‘Skins have never recovered from losing Chirs Samuels and Jon Janson as their tackles.
5. Kansas City - Eric Berry (S). This kid was dominant. When he smoked Tebow in midseason, I thought he killed him. Berry hits like a linebacker and can cover like a corner. The Chiefs defense has holes galore, and this will help fill one. Their offense has potential. Time to shore up the other side of the ball.
6.Seattle Seahawks - CJ Spiller (RB). This is a bit of a surprise, but if you saw Spiller play in college (off the top of my head I think of the two Georgia Tech games and the game against Florida State), you saw a man who could score a TD any time he touched the ball. That’s a playmaker, and that’s what Seattle’s offense sorely needs.
7. Cleveland Browns - Derrick Morgan (DE). The Browns could go quarterback, but Holmgren likes to develop them. That means he usually brings in the guys he wants from former teams (like what he did with Senaca Wallace). And the Browns haven’t done much with recent quarterbacks (Derek Anderson and former first rounder Brady Quin). Morgan can rush the passer and the Browns don’t have much in that department after whiffing on Kamerion Wimley.
8. Da Raiders - Jimmy Clausen (QB). Surprise. But isn’t the Raiders’ pick always a surprise? Jarmarcus Russell is still a question mark. Next to speed, Al Davis loves strong armed quarterbacks.
9. Buffalo Bills - Dan Williams (DT). The draft is rich in defensive tackles. The Bills get a plugger here to help their defense.
10. Jacksonville Jaguars (DE). Jason Pierre-Paul. The Jags have missed on some pass rushing threats in recent drafts and need to get better there. Pierre-Paul is a one year wonder out of South Florida, but his upside is huge. Could be the next Julius Peppers.
11. Denver Broncos - Dez Bryant (WR). Some see Bryant falling farther than this, but I don’t. He’s too talented and Denver lacks talent at the WR spot. Sure their defense let them limp to a 9-7 record (after a 6-0 start) in one of the worst collapses in NFL history. But it’s not like they generated a lot of points down the stretch either.
12. Miami Dolphins - Bryan Bulaga (OT). The Fins have shored up some troubles through free agency and trades. I see them taking an offensive lineman here to help keep their QB (whoever that turns out to be) upright and to help maintain the Parcells’ ground game.
13. San Francisco - Joe Haden (CB). Their offense played better the last half of the season (remember when the manhandled the Cards at home?) when Alex Smith got on the field. Singletary is a defensive guy, and he goes for the best corner in the draft.
14. Seattle Seahawks - Earl Thomas (S). They went offense with their first pick. Now it’s time for one of the best playmakers in the draft. Thomas could even play corner.
15. New York Giants - Roland McClain (ILB). The Giants defense was atrocious last year. McClain will help bring a new mentality to the middle of that defense.
16. Tennessee Titans - Trent Williams (OT). They too need defense, but the second best tackle is sitting there on the board for them. Offensive tackle is the safest pick to take in the first round and the Titans grab a good one here.
17. San Francisco - Brian Price (DT). I know this is a bit high for him, and the Niners could well trade out of this spot, but Price is from UCLA and is a human fireplug in the defensive line.
18. Pittsburgh - Mike Iupati (G). Pitt loves to draft guards in the first round (Allan Faneca). Though who knows if they’ll ship Big Ben and WR is a need after giving away Santonio Holmes. But the Steelers know they’ll be without Big Ben for at least four games. So they’ll likely have an inexperienced QB. What’s the best way to solve that problem? Get a great line together and pound the football.
19. Atlanta Falcons - Anthony Davis (OT). The Falcons get another falling OT who is a great value here.
20. Houston Texans - Brandon Graham (OLB/DE). The Texans need help on defense. Could you imagine Mario Williams on one side and Graham on the other?
21. Cincinnati Bengals - Jermaine Gresham (TE). I’d like to see them trade down. There isn’t a huge, glaring need on the Bengals (finally). If there was a higher rated DT or DE available, I could see them going that way. The other pick could be Taylor Mays. Either way they’ve only drafted one TE and one S in the first round in their history. But, then again, they had never drafted a CB in the firs round, and Lewis did that two years in a row to nab our starting corners. Gresham would be a sorely needed weapon for Carson.
22. New England Patriots - Sean Weatherspoon (OLB). The pats need help on their linebacking corps since they got so old there so quickly.
23. Green Bay Packers -Patrick Robinson (CB). Offensive line is a need, but they’ll grab one in the next round. The Packers love their man-to-man and Al Harris and Charles Woodson aren’t getting any younger. Robinson comes from FSU where it’s all man-to-man and he’d be a good fit for the NFC North.
24. Philadelphia Eagles - Marukice Pouncey (C/G). They just released some lineman and traded McNabb. It’s Kolb’s turn and they better protect him. Pouncey is a great value here.
25. Baltimore Ravens - Taylor Mays (S). Ed Reed is old. Mays could be the center fielder they need.
26. Arizona Cardinals - Demaryius Thomas (WR). They lost Bolden, so they take his younger self here. Thomas is a monster. He needs some work, but they can afford to ease him in to their offense.
27. Dallas Cowboys - Sergio Kindle (OLB). The Texas product doesn’t have to move. The Cowboys could use some youth in this group judging from how MN lit them up in the playoffs. And they get the best defensive player available.
28. San Diego Chargers - Carlos Dunlap (DE). This kid is a monster. He could go here or the third round. He has the long arms and quick feet a pass rusher needs.
29. New York Jets - Toby Gerhart (RB). I love this pick. The Jets lost Thomas Jones. They have a young stud runner in Shon Greene, but they need another big back. Gerhart is just that. Anyone who watched this kid play knows he’s the real deal and not just another Touchdown Tommy Vardell. If Rex Ryan were to design an offensive player - this could would be it.
30. Minnesota Vikings - Tim Tebow (QB). I know. Shock the world. But I've got a feeling about this one. Favre isn't getting any younger. And after watching Gruden work with him, I'm hoping he lasts until the second or third round where the Bengals might take a flyer on him.
31. Indianalopis Colts - Arrelious Benn (WR). I know they have young receivers who stepped up. But they saw what the Saints did - hit you with so many weapons you don’t know what to do. This is another weapon.
32. New Orleans Saints - Sean Lee (LB). The Saints have really unsung heroes at the linebacker position, so they go for a potential star here.
32. New Orleans Saints - Sean Lee (LB). The Saints have really unsung heroes at the linebacker position, so they go for a potential star here.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
451
We just finished 451. Well, I finished reading it to them. I could have had them read it silently, but that doesn't go over very well. Many struggle with Bradbury's overly descriptive and lyrical prose. They also struggle with his metaphors and allusions. At least if I read it, I can explain those things.
Here is a beautiful passage that I had forgotten about. Montag and the other book men - several miles from the town - witness it being bombed and destroyed. Montag laments Mildred's death. At that moment, he can't really remember anything about her.
Granger, one of the book men, offers this account of his grandfather, and what it was like to lose him. His speech reminds me of my father -
"When I was a boy my grandfather died, and he was a sculptor. He was also a very kind man who had a lot of love to give the world, and he helped clean up the slum in our town; and he made toys for us and he did a million things in his lifetime; he was always busy with his hands. And when he died, I suddenly realized I wasn't crying for him at all, but for all the things he did. I cried because he would never do them again, he would never carve another piece of wood or help us raise doves and pigeons in the backyard or play the violin the way he did, or tell us jokes the way he did. He was part of us and when he died, all the actions stopped dead and there was no one to do them just the way he did. He was individual. He was an important man. I've never gotten over his death. Often I think what wonderful carvings never came to birth because he died. How many jokes are missing from the world, and how many homing pigeons untouched by his hands. He shaped the world. He did things to the world. The world is bankrupted of ten million fine actions the night he passed on."
I haven't read those words since Dad died. How many things the world is bankrupted of because he is no longer with us. How Kenzie won't know his gentle hands and his slow, southern drawl. How she won't know he patience and his eyes full of kindness. How she won't get to ride in the truck with him or see him laugh.
How I miss our arguments. How his stubbornness. How I miss his slow, patient way of doing things.
But then I remember . . . it lives on in me.
Kenzie will know him and love him . . . through me. And Kristie, Casey, and KoKo. And Barb, Arnie, Matt, Amanda, and Ashley. And Kevin, Deeann, and Damara. And Gail. And all those other people dad touched and effected.
Then I read the piece below. I never realized how this stuck with me and struck me when Mom died. It must have lodged in my subconscious because the poem at the bottom of this post was what I read at Mom's wake. It echoes the same thing Granger is talking about. Yet, I never saw the connection until I just read this in class now.
"Everyone must leave something behind when he dies, my grandfather said. A child or a book or a painting or a house or a wall built or a pair of shoes made. Or a garden planted. Something your hand touched some way so your soul has somewhere to go when you die, and when people look at that three or that flower you planted, you're there. It doesn't matter what you do, he said, so long as you change something from the way it was before you touched it into something that's like you after you take your hands away. The difference between the man who just cuts lawns and a real gardener is in the touching, he said. The lawn cutter might just as well not have been there at all; the gardener will be there a lifetime . . . Grandfather's been dead for all these years, but if you lifted my skull, by God, in the convolutions of my brain you'd find the big ridges of his thumbprint."
Fingerprints
Here is a beautiful passage that I had forgotten about. Montag and the other book men - several miles from the town - witness it being bombed and destroyed. Montag laments Mildred's death. At that moment, he can't really remember anything about her.
Granger, one of the book men, offers this account of his grandfather, and what it was like to lose him. His speech reminds me of my father -
"When I was a boy my grandfather died, and he was a sculptor. He was also a very kind man who had a lot of love to give the world, and he helped clean up the slum in our town; and he made toys for us and he did a million things in his lifetime; he was always busy with his hands. And when he died, I suddenly realized I wasn't crying for him at all, but for all the things he did. I cried because he would never do them again, he would never carve another piece of wood or help us raise doves and pigeons in the backyard or play the violin the way he did, or tell us jokes the way he did. He was part of us and when he died, all the actions stopped dead and there was no one to do them just the way he did. He was individual. He was an important man. I've never gotten over his death. Often I think what wonderful carvings never came to birth because he died. How many jokes are missing from the world, and how many homing pigeons untouched by his hands. He shaped the world. He did things to the world. The world is bankrupted of ten million fine actions the night he passed on."
I haven't read those words since Dad died. How many things the world is bankrupted of because he is no longer with us. How Kenzie won't know his gentle hands and his slow, southern drawl. How she won't know he patience and his eyes full of kindness. How she won't get to ride in the truck with him or see him laugh.
How I miss our arguments. How his stubbornness. How I miss his slow, patient way of doing things.
But then I remember . . . it lives on in me.
Kenzie will know him and love him . . . through me. And Kristie, Casey, and KoKo. And Barb, Arnie, Matt, Amanda, and Ashley. And Kevin, Deeann, and Damara. And Gail. And all those other people dad touched and effected.
Then I read the piece below. I never realized how this stuck with me and struck me when Mom died. It must have lodged in my subconscious because the poem at the bottom of this post was what I read at Mom's wake. It echoes the same thing Granger is talking about. Yet, I never saw the connection until I just read this in class now.
"Everyone must leave something behind when he dies, my grandfather said. A child or a book or a painting or a house or a wall built or a pair of shoes made. Or a garden planted. Something your hand touched some way so your soul has somewhere to go when you die, and when people look at that three or that flower you planted, you're there. It doesn't matter what you do, he said, so long as you change something from the way it was before you touched it into something that's like you after you take your hands away. The difference between the man who just cuts lawns and a real gardener is in the touching, he said. The lawn cutter might just as well not have been there at all; the gardener will be there a lifetime . . . Grandfather's been dead for all these years, but if you lifted my skull, by God, in the convolutions of my brain you'd find the big ridges of his thumbprint."
Fingerprints
More 451
The above story about a private high school getting rid of its library and turning it into a digital cafe reminds me of 451, which we will finish today.
If only my class was more motivated, we could really explore this issue. But this class is not the most motivated bunch. They want to be told what to think and do. That way they can get it over with asap.
Sad.
And it too ties in to the themes of 451. If they'd only see the irony.
The story on the library mutating (and I think that's an apt verb) into an internet cafe is eerily similar to how books became illegal in the novel.
Beatty - Montag's superior - explains that people just tired of reading. When technology became so fast, no one wanted to devote days to reading. Their attention spans shriveled. Thus, they wanted the condensed form of the book. As Beatty tells Montag:
"'Classics cut to fit fifteen-minute radio shows, then cut again to fill a two-minute book column . . . Out of the nursery into the college and back to the nursery; there's your intellectual pattern for the past five centuries or more . . . Digest-digests, digest-digest-digest. Politics? One column, tow sentences, a headline! Then, in mid-air, all vanishes! Whirl man's mind around about so fast under the pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters that the centrifuge flings off all unnecessary, time-wasting thought!'"
Scary. It seems to me when Bradbury was writing this in the early '50s that there was a fear about radio and TV destroying reading. That did not happen. But it still might.
And that piece on turning a library into a digital cafe (replete with a $12,000 cappuccino machine) is disturbing. Especially when the young man being interviewed stated that he was just wasting his time reading the sources he needs for a paper when he could just be writing the paper!
Think too of how major news events are condensed into little bits of information that scroll across the bottom tracker of the screen. Gone are the days when a news radio reported got on the airwaves and claimed, "There is no news this evening. Good night."
Can you imagine?
It seems to me if there is no news, we'd invent it. Because some how, we need to know. So news becomes not just politics and major events but what so called 'experts' thought of so-and-so's dress on the red carpet or the sordid details of Tiger Woods' affairs or even our facebook status updates.
This worries me because this is fluff. It's nice to know or funny or interesting, but does it have substance? Or does it lead to one needing/wanting/craving entertainment rather than intellectual stimulation? In short, does it lead to Mildred? (Montag's wife in 451 who is a mindless zombie of sorts who simply lives to watch her 'families' on the wall to wall TV units in their house).
Ultimately you get the society of 451, which Beatty describes as
"'School is shortened, discipline replaced, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually neglected, finally almost completely ignored. Life is immediate, the job counts, pleasure lies all about after work. Why learn anything save pressing buttons, pulling switches, fittings nuts and bolts?'"
Spelling is pretty much extinct. Our computer software will do it. How many small schools carve into their liberal arts programs in favor of 'the basics' when they have to cut? Talk about life being immediate - just look at blogs, twitter, and facebook.
Reading about this society reminded me of this video from Soundgarden called "Black Hole Sun." When I read about Mildred and her brainless friends, I can't help but thing of these idiotically happy people in this video.
Later in the book, Montag seeks out a professor whom he once met. Montag wants to know why he tried reading but couldn't retain anything.
Faber explains that Montag is missing, for lack of a better word, 'context.' After a lifetime of reading, how can you pick up a book and expect to comprehend what it says? For Montag it's all just words. The ideas aren't sticking in his head.
Faber goes on to explain that to really appreciate books, we need three things -
First, books with 'texture.' By that he means books that reflect real life. Books that mean something. Books that stand up to the test of time.
Second, people need leisure. You need time to read and digest the information. You can't hope to get it simply using keyword searches on google or reading Cliffnotes.
Third, the first two things need to interact. That is, you need to read good books and have time to digest them. Then you need to be able to act or learn from what you have read. Try reading To Kill a Mockingbird and then see how that changes you. For me, it makes me try to see things from the point of view of others. It has changed me.
And I don't think I could have gotten that from a condensed version of the book or Sparknotes. I think of Scout realizing that one of the Cunninghams worked hard to get Tom's case thrown out because when that Cunningham came to lynch Tom, and Atticus stood up for him (with Scout's help), that made an impression on the Cunningham. He saw Atticus as a father and lawyer and man . . . just like him. In turn, he saw Tom that way. Thus, the Cunningham fought to have the case thrown out, though it wasn't. And when Scout realizes this, she proudly claims that she'll have Walter Cunningham (a relative of the man who fought to have the case thrown out) over for lunch all the time. Then, unfortunately, Aunt Alexandra has to have a talk with Scout where she tries to impress upon her the social codes of Maycomb. Finches do not associate with the Cunninghams, for they are white trash. The irony, of course, is that a little girl has learned how to have empathy for others while a full grown woman has never learned that.
And that is just one chapter of the book! But it's magic and it'll stick with me until the day I die.
Would I have retained that if I read it on a kindle and sipping a coffee from a $12,000 machine? I don't know. I might have been more tempted to skip the book and check out facebook or text or visit . . . and I might have been on my way to being a Mildred.
If only my class was more motivated, we could really explore this issue. But this class is not the most motivated bunch. They want to be told what to think and do. That way they can get it over with asap.
Sad.
And it too ties in to the themes of 451. If they'd only see the irony.
The story on the library mutating (and I think that's an apt verb) into an internet cafe is eerily similar to how books became illegal in the novel.
Beatty - Montag's superior - explains that people just tired of reading. When technology became so fast, no one wanted to devote days to reading. Their attention spans shriveled. Thus, they wanted the condensed form of the book. As Beatty tells Montag:
"'Classics cut to fit fifteen-minute radio shows, then cut again to fill a two-minute book column . . . Out of the nursery into the college and back to the nursery; there's your intellectual pattern for the past five centuries or more . . . Digest-digests, digest-digest-digest. Politics? One column, tow sentences, a headline! Then, in mid-air, all vanishes! Whirl man's mind around about so fast under the pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters that the centrifuge flings off all unnecessary, time-wasting thought!'"
Scary. It seems to me when Bradbury was writing this in the early '50s that there was a fear about radio and TV destroying reading. That did not happen. But it still might.
And that piece on turning a library into a digital cafe (replete with a $12,000 cappuccino machine) is disturbing. Especially when the young man being interviewed stated that he was just wasting his time reading the sources he needs for a paper when he could just be writing the paper!
Think too of how major news events are condensed into little bits of information that scroll across the bottom tracker of the screen. Gone are the days when a news radio reported got on the airwaves and claimed, "There is no news this evening. Good night."
Can you imagine?
It seems to me if there is no news, we'd invent it. Because some how, we need to know. So news becomes not just politics and major events but what so called 'experts' thought of so-and-so's dress on the red carpet or the sordid details of Tiger Woods' affairs or even our facebook status updates.
This worries me because this is fluff. It's nice to know or funny or interesting, but does it have substance? Or does it lead to one needing/wanting/craving entertainment rather than intellectual stimulation? In short, does it lead to Mildred? (Montag's wife in 451 who is a mindless zombie of sorts who simply lives to watch her 'families' on the wall to wall TV units in their house).
Ultimately you get the society of 451, which Beatty describes as
"'School is shortened, discipline replaced, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually neglected, finally almost completely ignored. Life is immediate, the job counts, pleasure lies all about after work. Why learn anything save pressing buttons, pulling switches, fittings nuts and bolts?'"
Spelling is pretty much extinct. Our computer software will do it. How many small schools carve into their liberal arts programs in favor of 'the basics' when they have to cut? Talk about life being immediate - just look at blogs, twitter, and facebook.
Reading about this society reminded me of this video from Soundgarden called "Black Hole Sun." When I read about Mildred and her brainless friends, I can't help but thing of these idiotically happy people in this video.
Later in the book, Montag seeks out a professor whom he once met. Montag wants to know why he tried reading but couldn't retain anything.
Faber explains that Montag is missing, for lack of a better word, 'context.' After a lifetime of reading, how can you pick up a book and expect to comprehend what it says? For Montag it's all just words. The ideas aren't sticking in his head.
Faber goes on to explain that to really appreciate books, we need three things -
First, books with 'texture.' By that he means books that reflect real life. Books that mean something. Books that stand up to the test of time.
Second, people need leisure. You need time to read and digest the information. You can't hope to get it simply using keyword searches on google or reading Cliffnotes.
Third, the first two things need to interact. That is, you need to read good books and have time to digest them. Then you need to be able to act or learn from what you have read. Try reading To Kill a Mockingbird and then see how that changes you. For me, it makes me try to see things from the point of view of others. It has changed me.
And I don't think I could have gotten that from a condensed version of the book or Sparknotes. I think of Scout realizing that one of the Cunninghams worked hard to get Tom's case thrown out because when that Cunningham came to lynch Tom, and Atticus stood up for him (with Scout's help), that made an impression on the Cunningham. He saw Atticus as a father and lawyer and man . . . just like him. In turn, he saw Tom that way. Thus, the Cunningham fought to have the case thrown out, though it wasn't. And when Scout realizes this, she proudly claims that she'll have Walter Cunningham (a relative of the man who fought to have the case thrown out) over for lunch all the time. Then, unfortunately, Aunt Alexandra has to have a talk with Scout where she tries to impress upon her the social codes of Maycomb. Finches do not associate with the Cunninghams, for they are white trash. The irony, of course, is that a little girl has learned how to have empathy for others while a full grown woman has never learned that.
And that is just one chapter of the book! But it's magic and it'll stick with me until the day I die.
Would I have retained that if I read it on a kindle and sipping a coffee from a $12,000 machine? I don't know. I might have been more tempted to skip the book and check out facebook or text or visit . . . and I might have been on my way to being a Mildred.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)