Player Led culture vs Staff Led

[Cam's New Arm]

Player Culture vs Staff Culture

What are some pros and what are some cons of this?

[Pejorative Miscreant]

I don't think there should be a difference and if there is a conflict, you have an implosion.  The staff and organization are there to establish culture from the FO down.  The players they bring in should personify that.  The FO ideally has the vision and the players execute on that vision.  What we see as fans should appear to be player led but it has to complement and be aligned with the organization.  

Just my opinion and I may be missing the point of the topic so apologies if that is the case.

[CRA]

well, players dictating things only works if you have the right collection of players to dictate things. 

and in all honesty, not sure if we can answer if we do or don't as fans given......there are no Thomas Davis types around that we know are actually about X and Y (based on years showing it).  Collective team is too new to us to know what these dudes are really about in terms of players carrying the burden of culture. 

[jfra78]

Staff led culture leads to player led culture.  

[Bear Hands]

If roles are clearly defined and boundaries are established, and good culture comes from a healthy mix of both. 

For example - a great coach can be the catalyst for establishing a baseline culture, but the right player in a leadership role can take that and bring it to an even greater level.

[Bear Hands]

Which is what I hope we have happening. Canales established a new culture in house, we rid ourselves of the Rhule era and the brief hiccup that was Frankie. 

And now with his own thing in place, he’s created the landscape for guys like Bryce, Hunt, McMillan, Brown, Horn and others to make it an even better thing to be a part of

[toldozer]

You need both. For all the poo game plans and bad game day management you had both under Rivera. From those all or nothing videos it was clear to me he had command of the locker room but gave the players who deserved it the power to lead. The problem now is we don't have  any Olsen, cam, Luke, TD's who have earned that right to lead. Maybe Brown but that's it. 

[Khyber53]

Synchronicity is the key. And it is a frikkin' hard key to get. The teams that have/develop it, win and win big: Chiefs, Eagles, Lions (can you believe I'm saying that?), Bills, Ravens.

Teams that only get one or the other going successfully peak at being competitive but sputter out in a couple of seasons... it just can't hold together.

And what happens when you have neither one working? I give you the last half decade of the Carolina Panthers. 

[TD alt]

31 minutes ago, toldozer said:

You need both. For all the poo game plans and bad game day management you had both under Rivera. From those all or nothing videos it was clear to me he had command of the locker room but gave the players who deserved it the power to lead. The problem now is we don't have  any Olsen, cam, Luke, TD's who have earned that right to lead. Maybe Brown but that's it. 

I mean, we have a relatively young team, and we still have a "new" team as we're building something. I'm pretty sure that someone will emerge between the youngsters and the free agent vets.

[MHS831]

3 hours ago, jfra78 said:

Staff led culture leads to player led culture.  

Yup.  the best cultures are not a plan, but an atmosphere.  Pay attention to Canales.  So positive you think he is trying to sell you something.  Eventually, it becomes contagious.  He still makes the tough calls, but he is positive about it (Benching Bryce after 2 games).  

Canales and Morgan are controlling the culture by modeling attitudes and bringing in the right players.  The trick is, let the players think it is their culture because they will protect it.  Assimilation.  Modeling.  Empowerment. 

[XClown1986]

It's like anything else. The leadership and staff needs to have a clear vision and communicate their expectations. Then the players have to buy in, hold themselves and each other accountable, and follow through.