Why underdogs should take more chances
37signals.com
37signals.com
Basketball lends itself well to "systems" that work well statistically over the long run: you get dozens of possessions, and the other team gets the same number, so you just maximize your average-case possession outcome (offensively and defensively) and the variance will wash out in a seven game playoff series, or a 90 game season. (Which is why boring teams like the Spurs succeed).
But soccer? In soccer, 95% of what you do has no impact at all. Even if it is theatrical, the average case outcome for a soccer play is that a goal isn't scored at all. So you can play systematically, except like football, a fluke play in soccer can win or lose the game. But unlike football (where interceptions are usually more the passing team's fault than the defending team's credit), soccer allows you to create fluke plays. You can spend most of the game doing almost nothing of interest, pull off a fluke play (at the very end, if you have a flair for the dramatic), and beat a team that had a slight advantage the whole game but never capitalized. Turkey repeatedly did this in Euro 2008 and it was the most fun I've ever had watching any team play any sport ever.
If you're an underdog, and you're going to take a risk, best check which game you're playing, and whether you're good enough for that risk to pay off.
The forward pass itself was actually an innovation that was introduced by UNC Chapel Hill into American football over 100 years ago. Before the forward pass, college teams simply brute-forced the ball forward.
"John Heisman, a noted historian, wrote 30 years later that, indeed, the Tar Heels had given birth to the forward pass against the Bulldogs (UGA). It was conceived to break a scoreless deadlock and give UNC a 6-0 win. The Carolinians were in a punting situation and a Georgia rush seemed destined to block the ball. The punter, with an impromptu dash to his right, tossed the ball and it was caught by George Stephens, who ran 70 yards for a touchdown.
Heisman wrote he was at the game standing near the action on the sidelines. He is emphatic that Pop Warner, who was coaching Georgia, protested to the referee to no avail. And he adds that he personally wrote Walter Camp, the final authority on football, of the possibilities of the ‘forward pass’ making football a new and more exciting game."
http://tarheelmania.wordpress.com/2007/09/13/unc-invented-th...
Two years ago, the Golden State Warriors implemented a fast paced "run and gun" style offense to offset their liabilities. They made the playoffs (and knocked off top seed Dallas) for the first time in years.
Last year the 1-15 Miami Dolphins brought back the left-for-dead Wildcat formation into the NFL and went from last to first.
The critical missing piece? Heavyweight management that knew what to do. Golden State's Don Nelson and Miami's Bill Parcells were both brought in specifically to "shake things up".
The problem isn't that underdogs don't take more chances.
The problem is that underdogs don't know how to do it.
Being an underdog startup is tough enough. Not knowing how to compete is even tougher.
To be accurate, the loss of Tom Brady and the addition of Brett Favre within the division helped Miami get 1st place instead of 3rd. If the Patriots beat Miami by having Tom Brady in just that game, then the seedings would have been Patriots, Jets, Miami, Buffalo. Miami had just enough success to compete with the Brady-less Patriots and interception-king Favre, barely winning the tiebreakers against them.
Also, the loss of Tom Brady in game one of the season likely inspired Miami, and beating the Patriots without Tom Brady, as well. In fact, the wildcat formation was first used against the Patriots, if I am not mistaken. Had the Patriots beaten them, would they have tried it again? Also, Bill Parcells didn't throw those balls; their players were versatile.
The problem isn't that underdogs don't take more chances. The problem is that underdogs don't know how to do it. Being an underdog startup is tough enough. Not knowing how to compete is even tougher.
This sounds fancy, but I don't see what you're saying.
The consistent failure of underdogs in professional sports to even try something new suggests, to me, that there is something fundamentally wrong with the incentive structure of the leagues.
This pretty sums up why I generally don't watch professional sports. I love basketball, but the way that it is played in the NBA is so conservative that it's about as interesting as watching paint dry.
I would love to see the pro sports leagues implement financial incentives in order to reward teams that are taking risks. The only organization I know that does this is the UFC (via their "Fight of the Night", "Knockout of the Night" and "Submission of the Night" bonuses), and perhaps not coincidentally, that is the only sport I find interesting enough to watch on a regular basis.
Because they can. There is a dramatic difference in talent between college and professional basketball. That difference changes everything (and makes it more boring for us).
So what would be the analogy in business or programming?
Usually guards are responsible for "penetrating and kicking" because they have the knowledge and dexterity to do so. But the average guard is maybe 6'3" 180lbs. Good centers start at 6'11".
I just don't think outsiders appreciate how much effort, skill, and knowledge it takes to drive to the basket and
a. take and make a good shot over a 7foot defender.
b. recognize the collapse and pass down low accordingly
c. recognize a double team and swing out to the parameter.
edit*: Maybe you just are not watching the right people. Have you ever seen Allen Iverson play? You'd like him. How about Dwayne Wade or Chris Paul ?
Sounds like PG ...
While I agree with the general spirit of the artiicle, this particular advice is just stupid. Maybe you don't need a written plan, but you absolutely need to address all the standard points in a normal business plan.