CheezWizHed

As a hiring manager, I'll give a few bits of advice as I've seen it (from a software engineering perspective - other industries might be different): 1) Cover letters: Few people use them anymore. The few that do rarely do it well or add value to the resume. If you do it, make sure you write one for the job you are applying for and it should detail succinctly why you are a fit for THIS job. It should show me that you did some research on my company and/or my position/product and connect it to your experiences. Don't give me a summary of your resume or a generic cover letter. 2) Focused Search: The fact that Indeed, Monster, and other hiring tools allow you to spread a BROAD net of applications out there does not mean you will have success finding a job you like. Quantity does not equal quality. Examples of how to do a focused search: - Read and understand the position you are looking for and know it is a position you want. - Read up on the company and know if this is a company you want to work for. - If you lack of experience in something they want, do some research on it and have a plan for how you would address it (i.e. need training, willing to take classes, request a mentor). I never expect a new hire to fit perfectly for what I'm looking for (I'm a little suspicious if they do). I love seeing someone that can evaluate themselves and has thought through how they will meet my needs as an employer. - yes, it is easy to broadcast 1000 resumes and hope someone bites (and someone probably will), but there is a good chance you will be walking into a bad situation or one you simply don't fit well. Bad examples: - Someone mentioned to me as I was interviewing him, "Which job was this one again?". We talked longer, but the interview ended there. - Another applied for an "Embedded Software Engineering" position with a resume that did embedded 10 years ago, but more IT work since. When my recruiter asked him if he wanted to do Embedded Software Engineering again, like he did 10 years ago, he responded, "No". 3) Know what type of job you want to do. I realize this might be hard for some of you thinking about changing careers, but you have to know yourself and how your strengths. If you have an interview, you should have a good idea that you actually want the job. Certainly, not all information is available initially - don't be afraid to say this job probably isn't a fit for me. I gave someone an offer recently, but was very open as to the expectations of how I would use him. I told him that I was confident he could do my job, but unsure if he'd be happy doing it. I let him make the decision on if he'd be happy...he declined the offer. And that was probably best for both of us.

It is technically true... So is paying Lovie Smith to coach technically paying him to tank the season?

I have no issues with less bonuses being handed out. Getting a pro bowl bonus because the people that actually were voted in just decided not to play doesn't really warrant a bonus, IMO. [sarcasm]Maybe everyone should just bow out so everyone else can be an alternate and everyone get a bonus?[/sarcasm]

That is a fair counter. But I never said that wasn't a problem; I just rated it 4th. For my top 3 reasons, a Janis/Bush type special teams player wouldn't fix. Even if someone like that fixed coverage, our ST unit still rates extremely low due to the other three problems (this was the point of my OP that started our conversation here). My main thought was that the other three things are really basic special teams functions that we couldn't get right. If you can't get the basics right, you have no hope of coordinating your coverage teams (which does take cooperation, timing, and discipline). Our coverage last year looked more like backyard "go git 'em!" football. And returners found a lot of holes to exploit.

I guess I always separate "low" and "cheap". If someone had an off year (or injury or age) that will depress his value on the market so we get a deal, that is "buying low". His price could be $1M or $100M. Cheap is simply buying low cost, low WAR players.

I think you can still get the "teams" together and do a ProBowl weekend. I saw a highlight of the 1on1 dodgeball competition (Jefferson won so MN news had it as a highlight) and thought that was pretty clever. Do a pentathlon of fun game events that the team has to accomplish and you can still make it an NFC vs AFC "competition".

Perhaps you should re-read my post... I pointed out that that type of special team specialist wouldn't fix the top three ST and listed them specifically. And I actually listed coverage as the 4th largest problem on ST. Sadly, as bad as they were on coverage... they had much bigger problems, IMO. If you read one single sentence out of that post, it could be misinterpreted as literally signing Janis or Bush. If you read the context of the post, it was pretty clear I was referring to that type of player.

By definition K, P(holder), and LS are all specialists. Fixing the LS would've fixed many of our woes last year, though I don't think you are talking about that in specialists. Having a return specialist would've solved our catching the ball woes. But Rodgers actually did do returns before, so it wasn't like they just threw him in the role. He just stunk. He wasn't just a 6th round pick. Neither Janis nor Bush returned kicks (I think Janis did once or twice, but that wasn't how he made ProBowl on ST either). So when you say keeping a ST specialist like Bush or Janis, I just don't see how someone like one of them would've actually helped our biggest issues last year. Would we keep a specialty blocker? Ironically, the main reason Bush (CB - UDFA and waiver wire pickup) and Janis (WR-7th rd) were kept on the team for the first couple years was the potential at their regular positions. It wasn't until a few years in that they found out they were ST greats.

[sarcasm]Yeah, thanks for the help... [/sarcasm] I'm pretty sure I understood he didn't want to sign Bush or Janis specifically. They represented special teams specialists that mainly were useful as gunners on coverage teams. I'm also pretty sure that my point was that our biggest problems wouldn't have been solved by specialists LIKE Janis or Bush.

I think they should just give up on the ProBowl game itself. It hasn't been relevant for years. The skills challenges and other activities seem more interesting honestly...granted, I've not seen either for years.

Neither Bush nor Janis would've helped our top 3 issues. 1) Can't block for 3 seconds so the kicker/punter can kick the ball. - I was amazed to see how often people just knifed through or where one person had to block two people. Just seemed like people were not on the same page here. 2) Fumbles when catching the ball - Finding a legit specialist would help here. 3) Missed FGs - I attribute this mostly to changing up the punter (holder) and LS (mid-season no less). But it got better. 4) Coverage holes - They had one return for a TD and gave up some longer returns. They seemed to resolve this toward the end of the season, however. Looked like we often would have some guys downfield on kickoffs way ahead of others, creating big holes in the line. Solutions: 1) New long-snapper. He had numerous poor snaps and blocking issues. 2) Find a legit return specialist. We stuck with Rodgers far too long. 3) A special teams coach that actually will train the players how to block and cover. 4) Replace Crosby? I'm not sure how many of the FG misses I place on Crosby, but it is clear that his leg is starting to age. We obviously kept a PK on the practice squad for a reason.

I saw equestrian gate and black mustang had his turn signal on and thought when did horses get turn signals. Yeah, I had to read it 2x to read it right... and I'm a Ford Mustang fan too! (Though, I neither own one nor a hockey mask).

This aren't going to get a guy like Bisaccia unless they commit to supplying him with quality personnel. Could we FINALLY be seeing a change in philosophy when it comes to how they approach special teams? Perhaps it will no longer be looked at as the Black Sheep of the organization. Beyond our long snapper issues, I tend to think most of the issues were more coaching and coordination of teams. It isn't like the guys we had out there were terrible athletes. They just weren't working together to block or tackle.... more like a bunch of guys out there running around together.

Congrats to you and your son! Sadly, some coaches are ignorant to the importance of that kind of stuff. Yes, it was rather frustrating. He sets up his son to be the ultimate sports athlete at 5 years old; he even wears a team uniform his own size. I couldn't imagine if his son was ignored like that on his last game.

It was my son's last home basketball game tonight. Traditionally, tonight is parent's night as the seniors get some special mention, and parents are given something in way of thanks. No one announcing his name starting at the beginning of the game. No mention of the seniors (there are 3) on the team and their last game at home. No calling out the parents at halftime for pictures. Bupkiss... I guess I shouldn't expect anything more from a coach that decides to attend a Viking game instead of coaching one of his team's games. What isn't bothering me is that my son scored a career-high 20 points (leading both teams) and a dozen or so rebounds. Our team lost, but he played well at least.

Mine is lower than that. Catch the ball. Don't allow blocked kicks.

I guess it depends on how prevalent it becomes, but I think it makes it a little more interesting. If a good player is stuck behind a great one and can still improve another team, seems fair to everyone.

My junior and senior year in HS, my BB team went to state both years. Unfortunately, we just bought tickets to attend it. But I remember sitting in the top deck and feeling like we were literally looking straight down at the court.

You did win a SB with the whole TB to TB situation, so my heart isn't exactly breaking for you... . You had to know he wasn't going to play for 10 years (despite all the memes on the internet).

Didn't see anyone mention Stephon Diggs as a trade example. Diggs+7th round pick = 1st, 5th, 6th, and a 4th the next year. Diggs was under 3+years of control, but I'm sure any team trading for Adams would require Adams agree to a contract.

Tom Brady is maybe retiring Tom Brady is retiring [sarcasm]Until the Bucs draft two QBs and TB suddenly wants to come back.[/sarcasm]

Aaron Rodgers is not a cold weather QB. The game plan for AROD and Adams to play sandlot offense all day and forget everyone else was terrible. The o-line configuration was questionable. Turner should've been RT with Nijman at LT. No idea why they kept trotting out Kelly. ("experience?") Our ST woes are a befuddling mystery. I saw a lot of blame on the coordinator, MLF, Gute, etc... But this has been a problem for years and years...beyond all of them. Now, I'm not saying to not fire the coordinator... but I'm at a complete loss as to how this keeps happening. It isn't like MLF/Gute haven't been addressing things... just that it hasn't worked. The second half offense looked like they were playing to not lose (prevent offense) and it worked as well as prevent defense normally works.

I'm going to state that both things were likely accurate.

of course that depends on whether you are already in an itemized deduction for other reasons (charity, taxes, school $$, etc..). The new levels for std deductions nearly eliminated my itemization, but I still itemize.

I was at that game. We didn't have enough healthy LBs to even field a defense by halftime that day. I remember one of our OLB practically dragging one leg while trying to catch CK at the end.