(un)OFFICIAL THREAD TO DEBATE PROS AND CONS OF GETTING TO PRACTICE EARLY

[Pejorative Miscreant]

Early by itself is a positive but doesn’t carry a lot of weight.   If it is accompanied by effort and results it definitely means something. If you are a guy in Coral’s position it certainly doesn’t hurt especially as he gains traction in the organization. 

[CPantherKing]

It's all about timing and individual management.

A team of precrasitinators won't win you a championship. A team of procrastinators won't win you a championship.

A good manager can find the balance for optimal performance and schedule accordingly so everyone will always be on time.

The Yerkes-Dodson Law applies when it comes to optimal performance and setting deadlines and starting gates with this law to optimize performance with the expectation that you want a majority of your team showing up exactly on time or a little late, but not too late... and definitely not early. This will optimize performance and create a non-linear approach to the groups problem solving over a 3 hour period of time.

If you want robots on an assembly line, then just load up on precrastinators. If you want high performance and outside the box thinking with risk taking and timing at it's most optimal levels, then you slightly favor procrastination, punish extreme procrastination, and devalue precrastination.

Reward the ones that are the closest to being on time without being early. Think of it as a Goldilocks Zone.

I expect many old schoolers, boomers, and good soldiers to disagree with this 100% of the time.