Has siege mentality set-in?
Perhaps it's just me...but I seem to notice that in many different situations (politics, sports, business, etc.), the longer and louder that someone calls for a change to an existing system, the more likely it will be that this system actually WON'T change.
That is, upper managment / decision makes will dig in their heels and refuse to cave in to the demands / wishes of the detractors. I call this "siege mentality"...and I can't help but wonder if it's applying to the Esks?
I attribute siege mentality to a few obvious reasons:
1. No one wants to admit they made a mistake. Even fewer want that mistake pointed out by other people and discussed publically.
2. In the sea of criticism, it is easiest to focus on -- and dismiss -- less-than-logical comments.
(E.g. Fire everyone, cut everyone, and build a new stadium 'cause we're cursed). As a result, the legitimate concerns of the (admittedly) knowledge few are drowned out by others and/or dismissed with the rest of the comments w.r.t. the team.
3. Duration of the siege -- at some point you convince yourself that if you can "just hang on a while more" -- even in spite of valid concern -- the ship will right itself and the crisis will be averted.
See: Riders. Barrett, Danny and Shivers, Roy.
4. Excuses readily exist and are used as a crutch to deflect blame from the ultimate culprit.
As it applies to the Eskimo's, it would seem that our injury situation will save the bacon of some of the key organizational members. But as others have routinely pointed out, there are a number of decisions that have been made that are head puzzlers regardless of our injury situation.
Were injuries the "excuse" for poor NI talent management?
Were injuries the "excuse" for the treatment of some veteran players in the past couple of years?
Were injuries the "excuse" for some decidedly puzzling play calling or play design?
And if injuries ARE an "excuse", what is wrong with our system that we didn't have suitable backups signed...or why were they released only to be re-signed later in the season?
5. Us-versus-them is critical in motivation in pro sports to win tough games. But should it apply to making business decisions?
Us-versus-them applies more readily to an external "force or entity". But for an organization to adopt an us-versus-them mentality with it's stakeholders (read: paying customers, players, media, etc.) is nothing but a recipe for disaster.
6. The detractors will talk the talk but they don't walk the walk.
How many of you REALLY will cancel your season's tickets if changes aren't made. This applies lots in business -- consumers talk tough with little action -- but it applies doubly so in sports because the revenue earned by a team translate to dollars available for top players which translates (ideally) to wins.
I feel that a strong argument can be made that boycotting a team by not going to the games truly does not "work" in a gate-driven sporting league. Not that it matters, because I don't believe there will actually be consequences to inaction.
So if this is true, what's the solution? Sit on your hands hoping for change? "Keep the pressure up"? I admit that I don't know...what I DO know is that life is too short for me to worry about these things in any great detail.
What happens with the Esks remains to be seen, I suppose.
That is, upper managment / decision makes will dig in their heels and refuse to cave in to the demands / wishes of the detractors. I call this "siege mentality"...and I can't help but wonder if it's applying to the Esks?
I attribute siege mentality to a few obvious reasons:
1. No one wants to admit they made a mistake. Even fewer want that mistake pointed out by other people and discussed publically.
2. In the sea of criticism, it is easiest to focus on -- and dismiss -- less-than-logical comments.
(E.g. Fire everyone, cut everyone, and build a new stadium 'cause we're cursed). As a result, the legitimate concerns of the (admittedly) knowledge few are drowned out by others and/or dismissed with the rest of the comments w.r.t. the team.
3. Duration of the siege -- at some point you convince yourself that if you can "just hang on a while more" -- even in spite of valid concern -- the ship will right itself and the crisis will be averted.
See: Riders. Barrett, Danny and Shivers, Roy.
4. Excuses readily exist and are used as a crutch to deflect blame from the ultimate culprit.
As it applies to the Eskimo's, it would seem that our injury situation will save the bacon of some of the key organizational members. But as others have routinely pointed out, there are a number of decisions that have been made that are head puzzlers regardless of our injury situation.
Were injuries the "excuse" for poor NI talent management?
Were injuries the "excuse" for the treatment of some veteran players in the past couple of years?
Were injuries the "excuse" for some decidedly puzzling play calling or play design?
And if injuries ARE an "excuse", what is wrong with our system that we didn't have suitable backups signed...or why were they released only to be re-signed later in the season?
5. Us-versus-them is critical in motivation in pro sports to win tough games. But should it apply to making business decisions?
Us-versus-them applies more readily to an external "force or entity". But for an organization to adopt an us-versus-them mentality with it's stakeholders (read: paying customers, players, media, etc.) is nothing but a recipe for disaster.
6. The detractors will talk the talk but they don't walk the walk.
How many of you REALLY will cancel your season's tickets if changes aren't made. This applies lots in business -- consumers talk tough with little action -- but it applies doubly so in sports because the revenue earned by a team translate to dollars available for top players which translates (ideally) to wins.
I feel that a strong argument can be made that boycotting a team by not going to the games truly does not "work" in a gate-driven sporting league. Not that it matters, because I don't believe there will actually be consequences to inaction.
So if this is true, what's the solution? Sit on your hands hoping for change? "Keep the pressure up"? I admit that I don't know...what I DO know is that life is too short for me to worry about these things in any great detail.
What happens with the Esks remains to be seen, I suppose.
Comment