​Think positive. It does work with some degree of regularity and in certain situations, but not 100 percent of the time.
 
A good friend of mine seeks to prove the positive energy theorem (good things come to those who smile, eliminate negative thoughts and adopt a sunny disposition) this year. His New Year’s resolution was to stop being Mr. Negativity. We’ll see how that turns out.
 
His big issue is on the golf course. I hadn’t given it much thought, but during a round late last year, I mentioned he should stop being so negative and it might help his golf game. That’s when he sprang on me that he was going to be Mr. Positivity in 2016. If he consistently shaves several strokes from his score, we will have further proof that a change in attitude affects goals and outcomes.
 
In my mid-20’s, I made a decision to maintain a positive outlook on life. There were conflicting career-related issues getting me down at the time, as well as trying to figure out where I should live, among some other concerns. I found myself dwelling on how to get through them, and having sour thoughts about the future. Reading several books on how to value our humanity, I came across one that discussed how everyone should dig into their core, decide what they are about as a person, establish their values, then live them. One of mine was to stay positive in the face of tough circumstances.
 
That hasn’t always happened. But for the most part, I keep the cup on the full side, using laughter and other means to help me roll with life’s punches (which get more intense through the years).
 
The current culture in the U.S. seems to have gone in the exact opposite direction, with whining, complaining and negativity becoming the norm. Everyone loses when we go down that path. In fact, I would argue that – like my friend – if you choose to live the positive life, events will turn out better for you for the most part.
 
Here’s one example, and all-time favorite:  When our two younger children went through middle school, they both played basketball. The gym was small. The crowds could easily make a lot of noise and rock it. A small dedicated group of supportive parents banded together around both teams, and the young student-athletes went onto have tremendous seasons in both 7th and 8th grade.
 
Was our cheering the sole reason for their success? Absolutely not. At the same time, there were multiple games up from grabs, and when our fans pounded the stands and cheered “DEFENSE” or sustained loud clapping, you could see our kids elevate, speed up, draw energy and attack.  It was often a spectacular display of energy, one our televeision-saturated sports world seems to have lost sight of these days.
 
Positivity makes us think better thoughts. If you watch too much TV news, you get regular negativity. That affects you in a bad way. Watch their use of adjectives, such as “harrowing, horrific, traumatic, divisive, ugly, vengeful, demeaning” and you’ll see how stories are crafted to make you think negatively about events and people, and worry more.
 
Getting you to worry more is central to their ratings. It’s central to the negative complaining culture in the U.S.
 
Think positive. Say nice things to people. See what happens as a result. Maybe your golf game improves, or your kid wins her next basketball game. If not, there’s always the next event where you can put on a positive cap and test the theory.

​Over the past 12 years, our family lived in two houses. Inside, neither demonstrated great connectivity for our smart phones.

For 10 years, we were in a log cabin. Friends and professional colleagues would call. We often couldn’t hear our phones ring, or if we did, the connection quickly severed. We chalked this up to poor receptivity, living down a slight grade from the street. Really, that should have been no excuse for us to get a consistent signal, but we used it. “Sorry we got cut off, let me go outside and call you back.”
 
The neighbors must have thought it strange, almost like a rock concert encore, as we trudged up our driveway, holding our phones over our heads, hoping to increase the number of bars to ensure it was worth calling back on a secure line. Typically, even then reception was spotty.

You could get on the line with the other person, and suddenly you’d talk into a dead phone. You might jabber away, then realize no one was listening.
 
Given that was two years ago, you’d think that more cell towers and better wireless coverage would improve the situation as we moved down the block to a smaller home. The new place is on slightly higher ground, and there are no big logs in the walls to potentially block signals.

Now our phones ring in the house. We pick up and someone is on the other end.  But, our voices are garbled. Give me a dollar for every time I’ve told the other person that I’d call back on the home line (after they’ve asked repeatedly for me to restate something that I’ve already related to them in a VERY LOUD voice), and I’d be retired.
 
There’s an old Abbot and Costello routine, “Who’s On First?,” where the two comedians play around with not hearing each other as they respond to each while describing base runners in a baseball game.  It’s a classic play on words that uses miscommunication for humor.

That was my dad and me this past week. We coordinated travel information for a family funeral over my smart phone, and his weakened state of hearing combined with my scrambled voice led to multiple, “Did you get that? WHAT?!??!? Say that again! Speak slower so I can write that down.” And so on.
 
He didn’t hear me, and I think I spent more time repeating myself than in initial conversation. Hopefully we got it finally right, but we won’t know for sure until we spy each other at the airport.  Poor connectivity makes for exciting times.
 
The promises made by wireless carriers would make us think we’ll live in a perfect world of voice clarity in less than five years. Don’t believe it.

Just drive through the high hills of Pennsylvania or Maine and see how long your signal lasts.  Don’t get on that business conference call in your car. Your coworkers will curse at you as you jump on and off, playing catch-up on the conversation.
 
Log cabins, hills and high winds all mess with your signal. None of those problems go away tomorrow.  Higher and more cell towers won’t eliminate the problems. They’ll improve the situation, but hardwire will remain more reliable.
 
Hence, we keep our home line. Speaking in situations that require accurate communication, it remains by far the best choice. Go fully wireless at your peril.

Now if I could just get my dad to dial me at home, we’d be all set. “Hey, ABBOTT!!!! Who’s on first?”

​It’s easy to forget how pleasurable singing is.  I was reminded of this a few weeks back as I sat working on my desktop and felt a smile emerging on my face.  Our younger daughter was up and about, preparing for her day before 6 a.m., and she was jamming away.
 
When she walked out of the bathroom, I called her over and told her how nice it was to hear her singing to start the day.  It warmed my heart.
 
I would love to say I go around singing out loud regularly and whistling (another great positive force), but I don’t.  Years ago, when I bicycled on my daily commute in Washington, D.C., I would sing at the top of my lungs on a daily basis, bellowing at the world, unleashing my personal twisted and bizarre lyrics based on my encounters of the morning.  It was a blast.
 
My singing didn’t go away because I stopped biking (which I eventually did based on where we lived and the increasingly maniacal nature of drivers and traffic in major urban areas).  I could have continued singing while mowing the grass, going for a run or cooking dinner.  Somewhere along the way though, singing slowed to a crawl, and eventually almost fully disappeared.  That’s sad.
 
Part of the reason our daughter’s voice jumps out at me is because I don’t find myself belting out tunes.  I listen to her and remember.
 
Singing makes you happy.  It’s a fundamental thing.  Throughout history, songs produce joy and good emotions.  Sure, they also address heartache and pain (can’t beat the blues), but even then there is a spiritual release of emotions that cleanses you and leaves you feeling refreshed and ready to take on the world from a new perspective.
 
Listening to a teenager sing also brings back memories.  As our daughter readies herself for cross country practice before the sun rises, and a day of sitting in high school classes, her harmonizing takes me back to those days, listening to AM radio, driving with my buddies, going nuts when our favorite songs came on.
 
None of us could sing, but that didn’t matter.  Spontaneity took over.  That’s all that mattered.
 
Do we lose that with age?  I would argue “yes,” at least partly.  There is no logical reason for the desire to sing going away.  It probably just slowly fades.
 
More importantly, can we recover our singing voice?  Most definitely, the answer is “yes.”
 
This past year for Christmas, I asked our daughter to get me a CD with some music she liked and thought I would enjoy.  She gifted me three “Linkin Park” CD’s.  One would have been enough, because I can only absorb so much at any given time.
 
After several listenings, I texted a friend of mine who lives in Chicago, telling him he should buy the CD, which I described as a cross between the Violent Femmes, Gang of Four, Public Enemy, Eminem and Pearl Jam.  It’s angry, loud, in-your-face, rappin’, drummin’, guitar kickin’, angst-ridden, pounding rock that rages and forces you to vocalize.

I’m not slamming my head against the steering wheel yet, and it takes me way longer to memorize words (never a strong suit to begin with).  But I’m getting closer, and someday I’ll walk through the door screaming lyrics and the dogs will cover their ears, my wife will run for the bedroom, and the cats will scatter, but hopefully our daughter will say, “Dad, it makes me smile to hear you singing.  But could you tone it down just a notch?”

(Editor's note:  This is a slightly different (and longer) column from me on a subject dear to my heart:  The future of our youth and basketball.  Having coached two of our kids for 9+ years and been exposed for multiple years to the increasingly competitive world of elite youth basketball programs, there are many facets of the process that disturb me.  These thoughts have developed over  the years, and I believe it is appropriate to put them out at this time, and welcome your perspective and willingness to share this essay with others.  Dave Simon)

Many college and professional basketball coaches in America would agree that freshmen/rookies report to their first day of work less skilled, less mentally equipped for success, and less coachable than they did 10 years ago. Although youth basketball is a billion-dollar industry and youth leagues, tournaments, and skills training are far more sophisticated and accessible than they were was 10 years ago, and major shoe companies are investing millions of dollars into youth basketball teams and camps each year, developmental (and character) skills still lag.
 
In this billion-dollar youth sports industry, there is plenty of money and recognition to go around, and just like any other industry, competing entities will find ways to cut corners, function more efficiently, and maximize profit and awareness. In the old days, major shoe companies like Nike, Adidas, and Under Armour provided financial and product sponsorship to hundreds of youth basketball programs of all ages across the country and it helped teams participate in dozens of regional showcase events each year. The idea was to plant the seeds of their brand in youth and solidify their position in sales for decades to come. This system directly impacted thousands of kids, and actually provided the framework for a thriving youth basketball industry full of potential stars.
 
Fast forward: Now these shoe companies have set up a more sophisticated youth basketball sponsorship system that only focuses on the best High School basketball players in the country. It provides a 6-figure financial commitment + product to approximately 30 teams nationwide and each team is micro-managed under a series of national showcase events each summer. Nike calls their series EYBL. These events only service the few hundred Super-Elite high school basketball players that are generally over the age of 16. Although this new system has slimmed down the direct impact of kids significantly, cumulatively, these shoe companies pour hundreds of millions of dollars each year into the maintenance and growth of their system. The idea is that by shrinking down the playing field, college coaches and talent scouts will get a more realistic evaluation of the prospect’s national competitiveness, while possibly saving time and money on travel and other expenses. The goals for the shoe companies include:
 
1) Having first dibs on the next Lebron James;
2) Encouraging players in their league to sign with colleges that wear their brand; and
3) Eventually there will be a super lucrative TV and publishing deal upon which the producers (shoe companies and affiliates) earn big bucks without having to compensate the actors (the players), which is protected by NCAA and state high school regulations.  
 
This new, Super-Elite system is far more efficient and manageable for the shoe companies, coaches and talent scouts. It is also a great opportunity for the extremely gifted and talented high school players, but has proven detrimental to youth basketball and thus detrimental to the future of our beloved sport at every level.
 
Under the old system, it was abundantly clear who the star player (or two) was and what the pecking order was on each team because most likely, the teams were composed of players from a particular neighborhood or city. An important factor under the old system is that there were players on these teams that were not seeking individual national recognition. Those players filled a very important role in each star’s development by not only giving the star time and space to show and prove their skills, but they also provided a natural environment for coaches/evaluators to assess a star’s ability or inability to make players around him better, be a leader, and rise to the occasion, which is the true test of a STAR.
Yes, the old system was more segmented, and finding a marquee game that featured 20 super-elite players on one court was very rare, but why are we seeking this? Amateur basketball is supposed to be about player development and character building not what the fans, shoe companies, college coaches, and talent scouts want. Player “development” helps breed hungrier, well-adjusted, and humbled star players.
 
Under the Super-Elite system, the best of the best are competing against one another, and one would believe this is best for the athletes. There is a flip-side though. The best of the best are also teaming up, which leaves less time and space for individual development because everyone on the team feels entitled and empowered to the same time and space to demonstrate their wares. There is no pecking order, just a mixed-up blend of wannabe stars with little integrity. Even worse, the shoe companies threaten to pull funding from programs that do not consistently land high level star players, thus fueling the fire for an environment that is all about stacking the teams with talent. 
 
Most parents and coaches that played or have been around the game at a high level understand that the “super-elite” environment is very cutthroat, unruly, and cruel; furthermore, there is a lack of loyalty, respect for authority, and trust. It takes great leadership and a master mind to manage this type of environment, and let’s be honest, there are no Coach K’s or John Calipari’s coaching High School Elite basketball. Instead, shoe companies are asking a pool of ordinary people who have connections to talented kids one way or another. Effectively teaching the super-elite amateur things like discipline, commitment, and character is becoming more difficult by the year. Only a mature mind with a strong support system will thrive at the top. Others will fall victim to the system and find themselves bouncing around and quickly deteriorating mentally and emotionally as their reputation dwindles. Why are we allowing this to happen to our kids?
 
The bigger problem is, the Super-Elite level system is bleeding into grassroots level, recreation basketball, and it’s already having a very ugly impact. Programs that are sponsored by shoe companies form feeder Super-Elite teams as young as 3rd grade. Parents and players are flocking to these programs as if it is the only way to “make it.” What’s happening?

• Players at a younger age are seeking to join top level teams rather than teams for the sake of improvement and game experience.
• Players at a younger age are having to do less on the super teams and are not experiencing the genuine adversity they must learn to overcome through competition.
• In order to make it in the sport, you have to really LOVE the game. In order for a kid to fall in LOVE with a game, it has to be FUN. Kids are being stripped of the LOVE for the game under these high pressure teams that only care about winning. It becomes less fun/recreational and more like a job, which they should not feel until they are at least playing collegiately.
• The “hype” around these teams and players from promoters to skills trainers etc., is causing an elevated sense of personal value, which has a negative effect on kid’s egos.

 
Ultimately, by anointing these young players too soon with an elite level status “EYBL” etc., we are communicating to them that they’ve accomplished the ultimate achievement, when in actuality, they’re not even close. Be careful, the Super-Elite system will ruin basketball because it’s brewing our most talented players in a pot that creates low-character, low-IQ role players with “superstar-like” egos.
 
What can shoe companies do to improve the direction of basketball?
1.Do a better job of vetting the leadership of the programs they provide access to their sponsorship status.
2.Prohibit their sponsored teams from managing teams that are younger than high school.
3.Band together and take a hard stance on disciplinary action for disruptive, disrespectful, and low-character players.
There is never a perfect solution.  But if parents weigh in and keep their kids’ long-term best interests in their minds and hearts, we can all make a difference.  Kids will be shaped into better adults, the game of basketball will rise overall in terms of the level of play and the character of the athletes, and the cream will rise more evenly.

​A couple of years ago, I bought a new pair of jeans.  They weren’t broken in.  They hadn’t been stone-washed, tie-dyed or buffed.  They were stiff and starchy when I put them on.
 
Two years later, they still aren’t really worn in.  Yes, they are slightly softer, more comfortable and malleable.  I like that.
 
At the same time, wearing them brings back memories of childhood and how much wearing a stiff new pair of jeans wasn’t my idea of a good time.  Much better to get hand-me-downs from my older brother, with their flexibility and ease of movement.
 
A new pair of jeans isn’t all it’s cut out to be when you have to spend years breaking them in.  That’s one of the significant reasons there are so many worn styles these days, giving you the look of having a pair being older than it seems, when really you may just want the improved feel of the fabric on your legs.
 
Fresh-off-the-assembly line jeans last longer, no question, so that’s one advantage to purchasing them.  Another is they likely will last longer before they fall apart.
 
Still…..  When I went back to college in the early 1980s, anti-consumerism still had legs.  Students dressed down.  We wore second-hand clothes.   Goodwill and the Salvation Army were the stores of choice to get jeans, shirts and furnishings for your apartment.
 
Several of us who worked together stocking shelves and bagging groceries at the local Sentry Supermarket began Saturday morning pilgrimages to the south side of Milwaukee to find hidden gems amongst some truly ancient items of apparel.

One of my first discoveries was a punch rockish-looking 1930’s sports jacket that had the WWII Army discharge papers in it from the man who donated it.  I believe, if my memory serves me correctly, he was a gunner in the infantry.  Wild stuff, and the coolness and historical factor made me hang onto that jacket for a long time.
Another time, we found a massive load of old school, billowy baseball pants unloaded by a sports merchandising outfit, and after the 50 cents I splurged on a pair brought attention from my baseball team, we bought out the stock and used them for our practices.  We became the retro team.
 
The jacket and baseball pants were incredibly comfortable and created a certain type of throw-me-back style.  You were hip because you were old school, wore second-hand clothes, and spent almost no money.
 
In a weird way though, we became over-consumers even though there was an anti-consumerism bent to our weekly expeditions to browse.  Because we could afford more since everything was so cheap, you bought more.
 
My recognition of this occurred one night at a party when a young woman admired my second-hand shirt, and (to impress her), I took it off (there was a tee shirt on underneath) and gave it to her.  I’m not sure if I got a date out of that, but it felt good gifting the shirt.  Afterwards I realized how easy it was to overdo it on clothes.

Ten bucks bought ten shirts.  If I had a real job, I’d buy one shirt for ten bucks.
 
Today, I don’t shop at Goodwill regularly (though it’s still on the occasional agenda), nor do I wear hand-me-down jeans.  But sometimes I want to do both.  If I chose to do either of those things, they would make life more relaxing and calming in certain ways. There’s a lot to be said for that.

​Over the holiday season, in conversations with friends and family, it became apparent that some smart person in the world needs to invent two useful gadgets.  Both are guaranteed best sellers based on in-depth discussions.

For a long time, syndicated newspaper columnist Dave Barry would test new products with his tongue firmly planted in cheek.  He’d find weird, useless, comical devices, then brilliantly rip them apart and poke fun at them.  He may still do this for all I know, but I don’t see the column in our local paper, which gives you the assumption he’s retired it. 
 
This end-of-year (EOY) roundup is different.  We really want to see these products produced.  They fill a void.  They improve lives.

The first is an app that would program the weather for your entire trip by car.  Our family found out the hard way that this is not currently available and paid the price by hitting icy roads that sent cars careening into ditches and down hills for 2+ hours until we plotted to get off the interstate and take a less direct route where the roads were not slick.
 
Our travels took us from the Dallas-Ft. Worth (DFW) metro area to Topeka, KS.  We checked weather for key cities from our home computer before we left, and from our smart phones as the journey began.  It was a tossup on whether to take our normal interstate route or up some two-lane roads that wind through small town America. 
 
The main route showed some rain, and slowly freezing rain and flurries.  Not good if that got slippery.

Alternatively, the country-ish path hit tremendous lines of thunderstorms for most of the drive.  Massive potential flooding.  Not good either.  We batted it around in the family, changing our decision 3-4 times before deciding at the last minute to head up our normal route.
 
If we had the aforementioned app, we could have tracked the whole length of the trip, identifying in real time when bad weather would exactly hit the roads we were traveling.  We could possibly have avoided the icy slick stuff, backtracked or identified alternative safer roads.  The world needs this new app.  Someone please invent it.  We need a coder to get it done.  Call me.
 
The second one is even simpler.  With several nappers in our group who still maintain land phone lines in our homes, it’s become increasingly irritating to have our sleepy time interrupted repeatedly by Presidential pollsters and people calling to seek donations for causes we don’t believe in.

Yes, we could disconnect our phones, but that would mean going around and unplugging each, then returning after the nap and plugging them back in.  Not gonna happen.

We want a switch that you can just turn off when the nap is imminent.  As the mindless pro football game grows increasingly boring and our eyelids heavy, we reach for the switch, click the telephone off, put the big cushy pillow over our head and lights out baby!  Waking up an hour later, we flip the switch back on, check the score to pretend we know what happened, then head to the bathroom to wipe the drool from the corner of our mouth.
 
We are refreshed, happy.  We can then go out to chop some wood, and hold intelligible conversations the rest of the day, pleasing those around us, too.  No more grouches in the house.
 
An engineer is also required for this product, which is universally applicable to all males every Saturday and Sunday (at a minimum).  HUGE market potential. 

Share this with your friends.  Have them contact me if they can design either one.  I’ll gladly test market either one.