Trick or treating in the workplace

Halloween is not a nationally recognized holiday, just a day where children get to dress-up and parade around the neighborhood collecting candy, sometimes after they already had a Halloween party at school. The emphasis should be on children; teenagers in high school have outgrown “trick-or-treating” and content themselves to eating the leftover candy the day after. But not supposed adult office people, not even those working on the public dime. They party like it is 1999, or 1989 or whenever it was when they were children.

Admittedly not all children grow-up, particularly those who are superstars in their own minds, believing the universe revolves around them—when they would be nothing without the contributions of people they give scant notice to, let alone respect. After all, what is the point of living, according to these people, if they are not “better” than someone else? Not that most people placed on the lower rungs of society have the time to notice this; after all, they must work long, hard hours and can only think of recovery when it is over. Others, it seems—particularly those on salary—have all the time in the world to prepare for playtime, even during “work” hours. People who work in warehouses or maintenance positions know the score:  while the adults have to keep the machinery rolling or clean-up the mess, the overgrown children must be allowed the pretense of being “superior” to such lowly pursuits by having all the perks.

Of course I’m being “unfair”; surely someone must have “superior” skills to work in an office, right? In the U.S., having technical skills is no longer a priority in the current workplace; although women are an increasing majority in college admissions and degrees (thanks to the abuse of Title IX, a de facto affirmative action program for which white women principally benefit), they only account for 6.7 percent of STEM degrees. While the supposed shortfall overall is increasingly being met by importing from Asia and India (overlooking their expired visas if necessary), many employers are now telling us that technical skills are no longer a “necessity” for employment in office environments, but “soft” skills are. What the hell are those? Speaking “right,” fitting in and not offending sensitive co-workers, and speaking “right.” All you have to do is to make simple observations of current office environments to discover who applies, and you might assume that not looking “right” is enough to disqualify a person on all of those terms. If they are changing from being all-white, it is not in the way the white nativists believe; having "soft skills" is the new mechanism of discriminating against the traditional targets.

But back to the children. People who work outside offices (or inside after dark) can only be but bemused by the necessity to pamper the children; over at Amazon, while there continues to be massive labor turnover at the gigantic fulfillment centers, office drones are allowed to do-up their workstations like dog kennels, so that their pets can keep them company when there is nothing to do outside the numerous breaks or opportunities to keep “fit for work” by slipping on skin-tights and going out for a jog.

Yes, I am being overly cynical, but it is not a lie to say that only children should be pampered to keep them “happy” and “productive.” Working people, on the other hand, are not only not “pampered,” but they are treated like they are replaceable if they notice the hypocrisy or question the status quo. Is this the way society should be run? I mean, if you are not a Republican or someone only so “progressive” as it only benefits yourself?

Why is the National Anthem even being performed before NFL games?

Donald Trump, after opening-up his stupid, lurid mouth and demonstrating once again that attending an Ivy League school does not necessarily mean you received an Ivy League education (anyone with enough money can “buy” their son or daughter a place in one of those schools), by twisting a legitimate concern (police abuse of lethal force) that only a small number of NFL players were acting in protest on into a full-blown protest against HIM.  Two Texas NFL franchise owners (Jerry Jones and Bob McNair) bought into his race-baiting tactics with predictable outrage from players. Of course, white fans are “outraged” because, well, if you make a lot of money you should be showing more “respect”—but not necessarily for the flag and National Anthem, but for their attitudes about black players making more money than they are.

To me there is an even bigger question: why is the National Anthem even played at all at non-Olympic sporting events? History.com, quoting from ESPN The Magazine, tells us that the first time “The Star-Spangled Banner” was played during a major sports event was during the 1918 World Series in Chicago, and only because of “heavy hearts” due to news of American casualties during the ongoing war in Europe, an apparent anarchist bombing in Chicago, and the fact that some players need “uplift” because the government had just announced that baseball players would not be exempt from the draft. “Banner” was at the time not actually designated as the “national anthem,” and was still only played sporadically in subsequent years and not “required.” The song did not officially become the national anthem until 1931 (many people then and today  believe that “America the Beautiful” is a much more appropriate song and should be the national anthem), and it was only after World War II that the NFL commissioner required that it be played before every football game. 

The problem with “Banner”—besides its clumsy shoe-horning of words and music—is that it equates freedom with war and violence, while “America the Beautiful” tells us “God mend thine every flaw” and that “success” be for a “noble” purpose, to love “mercy more than life” and a land that “crowned thy good with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea.” Perhaps opposition to that song is due to those sentiments offending bigots, nativists and xenophobes. I suspect that football players who are refusing to stand for the current national anthem would be more inclined to make manifest their support of the sentiments of  “America the Beautiful” if it were the anthem, choosing to demonstrating that it is much of white America that is disrespecting the anthem and the flag it represents.

The irony of Trump’s self-serving racist politicization of a serious social issue is that he made the attack on players before an all-white crowd in Alabama; if that “Blacks for Trump” guy was there, no doubt he still can’t articulate why he supports Trump, or appears to be off his medication. Alabama was the heartland of not just the Confederacy but the nerve center of segregation and Jim Crow, a state that has given us a “gentle” racist as Attorney General. It is the height of conceit and hypocrisy that this nation should taking orders from the opinions of people who should be the last one’s talking about “respect” for the flag and National Anthem. Better yet, let’s just stop the hypocrisy of even requiring its playing during sporting events.

Brett Hundley's scouting report didn't lie, the Packers are now discovering

The Packers are on their bye-week, but that doesn’t mean there is nothing to talk about after Brett Hundley’s horrible passing game in last weekend’s 26-17 loss, which could have been a lot worse had it not been for early New Orleans’ mistakes (the Saints nearly doubled the Packers' yardage production in the game). Hundley—who told reporters that he expects to be a “Hall of Famer” someday—said that “we” needed to get better as a team, while coach Mike McCarthy took the blame for not making the right choices in utilizing Hundley. Few on the major sports networks were willing to criticize Hundley too much after just his first start, but others were less sanguine. Rob Reischel of The Sports Xchange pointed out that while Hundley made plays with his feet, his passing acumen was sorely lacking:

Hundley never seemed to trust his protection and was shaky in the pocket. Once he was on the move, his accuracy was poor. And he never got into any type of rhythm with a group of pass-catchers that are typically in sync with Rodgers.

Even though the trio of Adams-Nelson-Cobb seemed to benefit from match-up problems throughout the Saints game, combined they only caught five passes for minimal yards. Others pointed out that Hundley never found the “sweet spot,” with all of his throws past the line of scrimmage either overthrown or underthrown. His late interception sailed five yards beyond the intended receiver. What is fascinating about this is that Hundley boasts about “learning” from the best—meaning Aaron Rodgers—yet what exactly it is that he “learned” is not exactly clear. Certainly not performance in live game situations, where the other team is actually trying to win the game and not just sitting back evaluating their roster. 

There is a reason why Hundley went from a Heisman Trophy candidate at UCLA to a fifth-round draft pick in less than a year. While draft scouts noted his athleticism and arm strength, there were grave doubts about his decision-making and ability to process at the line of scrimmage. Don’t believe me? This is what the scouting report from NFL.com said about Hundley before he was drafted:

Hasn't shown an ability to win from the pocket yet. Protected by play action-based short passing game that held linebackers and cornerbacks at bay. Internal clock is a mess. Has marginal anticipation, and appears to be lacking in ability to read defenses and create a pre-snap plan. Slow getting through progressions, taking 125 sacks in three years. Inconsistent weight transfer on throws, which affects accuracy (throws sail) and velocity. Needs to reset feet when swiveling from side to side while scanning for next target. Gets crowded in pocket rather than sliding to open space. Short-arms too many throws. Ineffective, inaccurate passer outside of pocket with lowest completion percentage in Pac-12 when scrambling (32.6 percent). Misses opportunities to climb pocket while keeping eyes downfield rather than taking off as a runner.

Wow. Anything else we Packer fans should know? There were those who said that he wasn’t going to get the help he needed to improve those deficiencies in college; he needed NFL-level training for that. And what better place than Green Bay, which has produced two Hall of Fame quarterbacks since 1992? Well, you have to be really good to begin with. Yes, we heard that Rodgers was a bit lazy in his first two seasons, realizing that Brett Favre was the starter no matter what. But in 2007 when called upon, he played every part of the talented passer he was supposed to be against Dallas, and the following year as the starter for good, it was clear that Rodgers was just an experience or two away from being an elite quarterback. He had the tools to begin with. Hundley apparently does not, or at least we see little evidence of it yet.

And McCarthy was supposed to fix this? He must have been reading that scouting report when he set-up last Sunday’s game plan for Hundley. Surely he must have learned something after more than two years behind Rodgers and all that “training.” The only thing we know for sure is that at least Hundley thinks he is a “Hall of Famer.” Or is that “Flamer”?

Green Bay is a game away from ""Now what?"

Last week I suggested that more recent or bandwagon Green Bay Packer fans may be in for a bit of a shock in the coming weeks, and older fans might want to recall what the “bad old days” were like from 1968 to 1991, when the team made the playoffs only twice after winning five NFL championships and two Super Bowls during the Lombardi years. Yes, Aaron Rodgers missed extended time in 2013 and the Packers still made the playoffs, but this time is different. Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace were not going to get the job done, and fortunately Matt Flynn had been cut by the Raiders in favor of Terrell Pryor (yes, that guy who is now playing the wide receiver position), and he manage to step right in and win enough games for the Packers to stand atop the worst division in the NFL that year. Admittedly even the greats can have bad  years; in 2005, coach Mike Sherman lost control of Brett Favre, who threw a career worst 29 interceptions (30 total as a team) as the Packers lost 8 of their 12 defeats by seven points or fewer (it didn’t help that the defense only had 10 interceptions that year). But you took the bad with the good with Favre, and fortunately you got mostly the latter.

Unfortunately, there is no Flynn to fall back on this time. I never thought it was a good idea to let him go; after all, Matt Moore has been a backup in Miami forever and he just led the Dolphins to a comeback victory over the New York Jets. Yeah, Brett Hundley is an athletic player, but even after taking a plurality of snaps during the preseason, often with the “first team,” and after a full week of practice, all he can do is 12 of 25 for 87 yards and an interception at home with one of the top pass receiving corps in the league, against a New Orleans pass defense that is average at best, giving up 268 yards a game. Hundley’s 39.9 passer rating wasn’t exactly an improvement over last week’s 39.6 rating, so the extra work didn’t seem to be of much assistance. Comparing him to Dak Prescott? Even comparing him to Geno Smith could be considered an insult to Smith. The Packers stayed in the game because of another stellar outing by running back Aaron Jones, and two early Drew Brees interceptions, but the eventual outcome, a 26-17 defeat, was predictable. 

Where to go from here? The Packers certainly can’t expect to rush for 180 yards every week, and last week demonstrated what happens when they don’t. Colin Cowherd of Fox Sports noted last week that the Packers’ front office had done a poor job of building the team, particularly on defense. Without Rodgers, the Packers just are not a very good team. But if you insist that the Packers are a good team, then what does that say about Hundley? The Packers will start Hundley next time because they simply have no choice to because of the politics. But if he does play poorly against the Lions after the bye week (and it is a fair bet he will), Mike McCarthy will have to come to grips with the fact that he and the front office have relied too much on one player to mask some glaring problems with this team, and it starts with the backup quarterback position. If Hundley doesn’t improve in a hurry, the only conceivable “gimme” game on the schedule is at Cleveland, and even that is no longer a “sure” thing, unless Joe Callahan or someone with a little experience available on the open market can step in and provide competent play.