Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Player Led culture vs Staff Led


Recommended Posts

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.

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MHS831 said:

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. 

Agree on Canales I think he can be a very very good head coach. Still not sold on gm Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said it's both. One creates the other. But it also takes time sometimes years. And there have been teams lately with new car smell coaching staffs that looked like they were putting it together quickly but things came crashing back down to Earth. Sustainability is the key. For that to happen the meddling of our owners has to stop and they cannot be tempted to return to their ways over any bump in the road either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is about getting open and YAC....and the QB we have.  You basically are just highlighting average depth when targeted vs 2 players. .  And yeah, I often say AT is a small slow reliable TE in terms of what he does for us.   That's what he is.   I think a couple of you want to make this into a Renfrow argument.   I'm a Renfrow fan.  Renfrow does not check the box of what a BY O needs either at the slot.  Renfrow just a niche roleplayer at this level.  it's easy to look up how horrific AT is with the ball in his hands and in terms of getting open.....and it's also easy to look up what a low ceiling of an offense the steady AT diet produces w/ BY. 
    • The one time he's actively tried to lose was the best we've ever done.
    • I simply acknowledge BY is the QB.  And just like we did when we drafted him.....the type O you would need to setup around him for success was always pretty simple.  But we have done virtually the opposite.  XL dropping some passes isn't why we were ranked the 32nd O and 30th passing the past 2 years.  *Ricky Prohel was brought up only in regards to role function he served on the team.  Niche/specialist.   He wasn't eating up the snaps in the O.    AT should have a similar snap %. People could MAUL Ricky Prohel and put hands all over him.   We got to the Super Bowl in part because we were mauling guys (our slot CB).   You can't do that now.  AT has a MUCH easier life and still can't get open.  Or run.    If you live in 3 WR sets, with a weak armed QB, and you choose to put someone who can't get open or run in the slot.......well, your are going to have a weak pass O.  That's by design IMO.  
×
×
  • Create New...