Coach: There's no 'I' in team.
Player: No, but there is a me.
Coach: What?
Player: A 'me'. The letters to spell 'me', you know, 'm' and 'e', are in team.
Coach: I know how to spell 'me'.
Player: Right! So, you could say that 'I' is in team.
Coach: 'I' is not in team.
Player: But 'me' is, and me is a synonym for I. You and me. You and I. They're pretty much the same thing.
Coach: What are you saying?
Player: I'm saying that, in a sense, I is in team.
Coach: It's not.
Player: It kind of is, and so is am.
Coach: There's a what now?
Player: The letters to spell 'me' are in team and so are the letters to spell 'am'. Both are about a sense of self, an individual, so, by that count, I is in team twice.
Coach: I is not in team. Why don't you understand that?
Player: And maybe you should understand that your aphorism is miscast. That you should stop parroting cliches if you really want to make a team become more than the sum of its individuals.
Coach: Okay, smart guy. I got one for you. Since you're so struck on letters.
Player: What? What now?
Coach: Not only is there no 'I' in team, now there's no you either. You're off the team.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment