The Importance of Recognizing More Than Just Performance in Youth Sports

In the world of youth sports, coaches hold a unique position of influence and responsibility. They are tasked not only with guiding young athletes to victory but also with nurturing their personal growth and emotional well-being. However, a recent incident involving one of the best players on a team underscores a troubling trend: the neglect of the human aspect of coaching. This player, who faced the profound loss of a parent during a short season, was inexplicably overlooked when it came time to nominate players for "first team," "second team," and "honorary mention" accolades. 

The Overlooked Star 

Amidst a roster of 17 players, one would assume that evaluating the top six for honors would be a straightforward task. Yet, the coach in question failed to recognize the contributions and the resilience of a player who not only excelled on the field but also navigated the profound grief of losing a parent. This was not a matter of having too many candidates; it was about acknowledging a young man’s extraordinary perseverance under challenging circumstances. 

The Failure to Acknowledge Human Struggles 

The oversight becomes even more egregious considering the context. This player was not just any player; he was arguably the best on the team. His dependable performance and the positive impact he had on the team’s fortunes were undeniable. When he finally got the chance to play, he changed the team’s trajectory, leading them to the playoffs. Yet, his significant contributions were overshadowed by the coach’s apparent need to prove himself and secure a permanent position. The Coach's Misguided Priorities The coach’s actions highlight a concerning prioritization of personal ambition over the well-being of the players. By focusing solely on winning and securing a permanent role, the coach neglected the emotional and physical health of the team. This approach not only disregarded the immense personal challenges faced by the grieving player but also resulted in the overuse and potential injury of other players. The relentless schedule—playing the same Starting XI two to three games a week, with daily practices for six weeks—was not justifiable, especially in games that had little bearing on the team’s overall success. 

The Need for Compassionate Leadership 

Youth sports should be a platform for teaching resilience, teamwork, and empathy. Coaches play a pivotal role in shaping the experiences and development of young athletes. A truly great coach recognizes that their responsibility extends beyond winning games; it includes supporting players through personal challenges and celebrating their contributions both on and off the field. This situation serves as a stark reminder of the importance of compassionate leadership in youth sports. Coaches must balance their competitive drive with empathy and understanding, ensuring that they are attentive to the personal struggles and achievements of their players. Recognizing and honoring the efforts of all team members, especially those facing significant personal challenges, is essential to fostering a positive and supportive team environment. 

Conclusion: A Call for Change 

The failure to acknowledge the grieving player’s contributions is a disheartening reflection of a coach’s misplaced priorities. It underscores the need for a shift in how we evaluate and celebrate young athletes, emphasizing the importance of recognizing their personal resilience and growth alongside their athletic achievements. Coaches must strive to be more than just tacticians (and this coach was no Pep Guardiola); they must be mentors, supporters, and advocates for their players. By prioritizing the well-being and development of their athletes, coaches can create a more inclusive and empathetic sporting environment, ultimately leading to not just better teams, but better individuals. In the end, the legacy of a coach is not measured by the number of games won, but by the positive impact they have on the lives of their players. Let us hope that future coaches learn from this example and choose to lead with compassion, integrity, and a genuine commitment to the holistic development of their athletes.

The Pitfall of Person-Centric Scholarship: Why We Need to Focus on Ideas, Not Idols

In the realm of academic scholarship, particularly in the humanities, there is a growing concern that the focus is shifting away from the substance of the research and more towards the personalities behind it. This trend, where the spotlight is cast more on the "man" than the "scholarship," raises significant questions about the integrity and objectivity of academic discourse. It’s becoming less about rigorous inquiry and more about aligning oneself with a particular authority or figurehead. This shift not only stifles intellectual curiosity but also cultivates a culture of intellectual laziness, where the primary question becomes, "Who do you believe in?" rather than "What can we learn from this?" 

The Idolization of Academics Within Academia 

In many academic circles, scholars are often elevated to the status of intellectual idols. Their theories and interpretations become dogma, and their reputations overshadow the actual content of their work. This idolization can lead to a form of academic tribalism, where scholars and students alike align themselves with particular figures rather than engaging critically with the ideas presented. This phenomenon is particularly evident in debates where the validity of an argument is often judged based on the scholar’s reputation rather than the merits of the argument itself. Statements are taken at face value if they come from a well-regarded figure, while the same statements might be scrutinized more rigorously if presented by a lesser-known scholar. This bias undermines the fundamental principles of scholarly inquiry, which should prioritize evidence and reason over prestige and authority. 

The Comfort of Belief Over Inquiry 

The tendency to align with established scholars provides a form of intellectual comfort. It allows individuals to bypass the arduous task of critically evaluating every argument and exploring every possibility. Instead of engaging deeply with the material, one can simply defer to the authority of a respected academic figure. This approach not only limits personal growth but also diminishes the collective advancement of knowledge. By choosing belief over inquiry, the academic community risks falling into a pattern of intellectual complacency. The true spirit of scholarship, which thrives on questioning, doubting, and exploring, is replaced by a superficial allegiance to established authorities. This shift is particularly detrimental in fields that require constant re-evaluation and reinterpretation of evidence, such as history, philosophy, and literary studies. 

Embracing Intellectual Uncertainty 

To combat this trend, there needs to be a renewed emphasis on intellectual humility and the acceptance of uncertainty. Scholars should embrace the mindset of "I don't know, but I am trying to understand." This approach encourages continuous learning and critical thinking, fostering an environment where ideas are evaluated based on their merits rather than the reputation of their proponents. Promoting a culture of inquiry over belief means encouraging scholars and students to engage deeply with the material, question assumptions, and explore alternative interpretations. It requires a commitment to intellectual rigor and a willingness to challenge even the most established ideas. By doing so, the academic community can ensure that scholarship remains dynamic, innovative, and genuinely reflective of a collective pursuit of knowledge. 

Conclusion: Shifting the Focus Back to Ideas 

The focus of academic scholarship should always be on the ideas themselves, not the individuals who propose them. By prioritizing rigorous analysis and open-minded inquiry over allegiance to intellectual figures, the academic community can foster a more vibrant and productive scholarly environment. It is through this commitment to the substance of scholarship, rather than the stature of scholars, that true intellectual progress can be achieved. In the end, it is not about who we believe in, but what we can learn through diligent, critical, and open-minded exploration. Let us strive to cultivate a culture of scholarship that values questions over answers, ideas over idols, and learning over belief.

A Remembrance that Cracked Me Up Today

I was killing myself laughing today. My parents who are both dead now came to see me in Orlando when I was living there around 2002. I had broken up with my then girlfriend, now wife, and was wallowing in self-pity. My parents were worried about me. So I tried to convince my then "girlfriend" a stripper from Cleo's Nightclub who was very beautiful especially naked to come to dinner to meet my parents for dinner. She never showed up. We still continued to go out "informally" afterwards. She started bringing her daughter on our dates. But I remember sitting in a bad restaurant in Orlando (there are many) with my Canadian parents with my then "girlfriend" as a no show and I wonder what would my parents have thought if she actually had come to dinner. It's one of those, who knows. She was very beautiful. I only missed my ex-girlfriend when my current love wasn't around. I strangely managed to figure out the passwords for both ex and current girlfriend at the time so I was able to get "real time" information on both (I was continuing to talk to my wife almost daily as she was also going out with someone else). Her then boyfriend also figured out her password it turned out (I think both my ex and my currrent girlfriends passwords were 12345 or something like that). It was a crazy time.

The Truth About the Secret Mark Debate in Scholarship

Let's be honest. If the Toronto Maple Leafs made it to the Stanley Cup finals against the Seattle Kraken, I know who I'd root for—Leafs all the way. The Leafs haven’t clinched a Stanley Cup since before I was born, marking one of the longest droughts in sports. My wife would cheer for the Kraken, reflecting our split allegiances since moving from Toronto to Seattle. Though we're no longer hockey fans, these loyalties linger. But scholarship shouldn’t work like this. It should be a quest for truth, unswayed by personal biases. 

In the realm of religious scholarship, however, biases are all too common. It’s not as straightforward as outsiders might think. The "bad" scholars aren’t just "religious people" advocating for a literal interpretation of the Bible. The controversy over Secret Mark, supposedly discovered by Morton Smith as an 18th-century manuscript of a letter by Clement of Alexandria about a hidden gospel of Mark, initially stirred up by religious fervor, has evolved. By 2024, figures like Mark Goodacre have shifted all debates about New Testament texts towards supporting the fourfold gospel canon established by Irenaeus around 195 CE. This isn’t necessarily about religiosity; rather, it seems driven by a preference for order over chaos—a desire for the safety of established narratives over the uncertainties that come with alternative accounts. 

This isn’t about a religious conspiracy but reflects a broader tendency towards conservativism, particularly among certain demographics seeking comfort in the familiar. This group clings to the notion that all gospels derive from the four canonical ones as a defense against the messiness of history that suggests we may never fully understand early Christianity. Such theories offer a false sense of security, suggesting everything boils down to how Matthew and Luke adapted Mark’s gospel. 

The reality is that Luke was unknown before Irenaeus, who likely fabricated this gospel towards the end of the second century. References to Matthew from earlier times show it as distinct and sometimes at odds with canonical Mark. Moreover, Marcion, predating Irenaeus by generations, possessed a gospel linked directly to Paul, who Marcion claimed as the only true apostle—using the term in a way typically reserved for Moses, a singular spokesman for God. 

The insistence by some scholars on a fixed four-gospel canon overlooks the richness and complexity of early Christian writings, including numerous non-canonical texts. The debate over the authenticity of Secret Mark, whether it's an authentic letter, an ancient fabrication, or a modern forgery, remains unresolved. But the efforts by Goodacre and his followers to promote a simplified, sanitized version of Christian origins only serve to shield academia from the full spectrum of early Christian diversity. Our understanding of these texts continues to evolve, and assertions about a so-called orthodox canon as the definitive Christian narrative are not only misleading but also dismissive of the broader historical context that shows a far more varied Christian expression.

Tertullian's Borrowing from Irenaeus

Irenaeus Adv Haer 4.6 "Yea, even the demons exclaimed, on beholding the Son: We know You who You are, the Holy One of God. Mark 1:24 And the devil looking at Him, and tempting Him, said: If You are the Son of God; Matthew 4:3; Luke 4:3 — all thus indeed seeing and speaking of the Son and the Father, but all not believing [in them]." 

Tertullian Adv Marc 5.6 But now it is not permissible even for me to interpret the princes of this world as meaning the virtues and powers of the Creator, on the ground that to them the apostle imputes ignorance: while yet according to our gospel even the devil at the temptation knew who Jesus was, and according to the document you share with us the evil spirit knew that he was the holy one of God and was named Jesus and had come to destroy them.

I Don't See Any Obvious Errors in the Greek of the Letter to Theodore Other than a Missing Accent

The Seventeenth Sentence of the Letter to Theodore as Transcribed by Agamemnon Tselikas

Διὰ τοῦτο ἡ σοφία τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ Σολομῶντος παραγγέλλει, ἀποκρίνου τῷ μωρῷ ἐκ τῆς μωρίας αὐτοῦ, πρὸς τοὺς τυφλοὺς τὸν νοῦν τὸ φῶς τῆς ἀληθείας δεῖν ἐπικρύπτεσθαι διδάσκουσα.

"For this reason, the wisdom of God through Solomon commands, 'Answer the fool according to his folly,' teaching that the light of truth should be hidden from the blind."