oldmanfan

Followed itvwhen they played back in the 80's-90's. Your question was about Jordan as owner 20-30 years later, and I don't follow it now. Brilliant deduction on your part.

You've offered nothing approaching detail in any of your posts that I can see. All you keep whining about is that culture means nothing, which flies in the face of pretty much anything known about organizational success. Jordan? I don't follow the NBA, but if I had to guess it's because he has not as an owner put into place the kinds of policies and procedures necessary to be successful in the league. Culture is to define what your goals are as an organization, how you do your work, how you set your priorities, how you align your organization to achieve your goals. Reinsdorf, Jackson et al did that with the Bulls, Jordan had to buy in and help with that. He now has to set that as the leader of the entire organization.

Keep on proving my point. Kodak failed because their culture did not allow them the strategize appropriately enough to adapt. When you say winning culture is for losers - that pretty much shows your ignorance of how successful operations are successful operations.

Not really. A big part of the job of any leader of any organization is to set the culture up front, set the parameters by which your organization will run, what it will prioritize, what it will value. Those who get it stay around to help build, those that want to fight that wind up leaving. Now, the leader also has to do a good job of explaining the rationale why she or he sets those priorities, and of course has to attract and maintain talent regardless if that talent is a nurse or graphic designer or forklift operator or NFL player. But it still comes down to setting the culture of how you want your organization to function, how you want it to be. Setting strategies based on that. A good example of setting a culture with expectations is Belichick. What does he say to his players, what is the culture he has set? "do your job." a simple statement, but one that has profound effects on how that team operates.

I certainly don't agree with everything they're doing with respect to the roster. I would like to see a veteran QB backing up Allen. I'd start Boettiger and Teller. But to argue that organizational culture is immaterial to the success or failure of an organization is just mind boggling and flies in the face of pretty much everything known about organizational strategy. S I couldn't agree more about whether or not they'll be successful. It will depend on Allen developing, and how well they draft and get FAs in within the next year or two. And how they approach that, how they do that? Part of their culture.

Another blowhard who can't answer the question posed. Name me one successful organization, one organization with sustained success, that does not have a successful culture established. I know you won't even try; you'll just start yelling again about how the Pegulas are only interested in getting money and the rest of your usual blather. And I have said more time than I can count now that McD and Beane have a plan, and how well they execute that plan will determine their fate. Part of that plan will be to use the picks and cap space they have to get good players.

Just proving my point once again. first, it's clear you have no idea about how successful organizations are run. Second, you know why I mention guys like Jordan? because they are the epitome of successful culture. Talented guys who despite their talent were also the guys who worked the hardest in practice, who made their teammates work hard, held them up to a higher standard. There's a reason guys like Iverson, also very talented, never won anything. They did not establish or buy into a culture tuned into success. Just admit you have no clue and move on. I've put a challenge out there to name me just one successful organization that did not care about their culture. If you're so smart and think it means nothing, name one. You think guys like Dareus and Gilmore are fighting the cultures established by their current teams? You think Gilmore especially tells Belichick he doesn't care about how they do things in New England. Laughable.

Your points are moot. Has nothing to do with amount of time a career has, injuries, etc. Successful organizations built for sustained success have cultures that support such success. I am astounded at how many people here fail to grasp that. Go talk to your CEO of your company and ask her or him.

I think McD sent Daboll a message this week.

I agree this is an interesting topic for discussion, and I am not trying to take shots at your comments, merely to respond to them. You said his idea of culture is similar to his "trust the process" statements. In a way, yes. Trusting the process means to me the entirety of what McD and Beane are doing to met their vision of building a team that will compete for titles every year, and win Lombardis. Culture to me is somewhat different, and I have already indicated what I think his view of culture is: it's dedication to football. Whether it's what you're doing in the weight room, film room, practice field, or in games, are you giving maximum effort to being a successful NFL player. I like all your thoughts on strategy. All of these are important in building a team. And that roster building strategy is formulated based on establishing the kind of culture for the organization. Talent without discipline can work, but more times can be destructive. That is why they likely were not interested in a guy like Gordon. It is why Dareus got traded (as you correctly point out you don't have a DT commanding the highest salary on a team, especially if he doesn't fit the culture). I would be interested in your thoughts on the way successful franchises of the past and present have successful cultures. Part of that is having your best guys, guys like Brady, Jordan, Bird, be the guys who demand excellence from their teammates, demand accountability. Right now with the Bills it's McD driving that bus, with help from guys like Kyle and Zo. As things go forward, and as he builds the team, what one hopes to see is that the mainstays of the team (hopefully guys like Allen and Edmunds) demand that same accountability. Then you'll know you have something. Then you bring in maybe a guy that's more of a challenge and the team and its culture are so set in place that a guy like that adjusts his perspective. So to me culture is where you start. Not that strategy isn't necessary, it certainly is. Not that as part of that strategy you have to find talented players that are complementary and so on. But before you do that, you have to know who you are and what you are as a team and an organization. And that's culture. Yes I do. The reason I talked about my organization is I saw and have been a part of how changing the culture of the organization led to enhanced success. If you don't think that the culture of an organization means anything to success, then you clearly don't know anything about how successful organizations are created. I'll stand by that - the examples are far too numerous to mention, both in and out of sports.

I read your post in response to what I wrote. And based on that you clearly have no idea how successful organizations operate. What exactly did I miss?

That's because you're a fan and not the HC or GM. They want to be playing for one, or in contention for one, every year.

Good point. They have a ton of draft picks and the ability to go out and get several FAs with the cap space they cleared. The success or failure of these decisions, as well as ones already made such as Allen, will ultimately determine their fate. They will of course look for talent, but also guys they see as a fit within the organization. From that perspective, is that any different than any HR department in any company?

I don't think he's saying that. Some are thinking he is saying that talent and culture are mutually exclusive. He said nothing of the kind. He said culture trumps strategy. Not that strategy is trivial, but that to have a consistently successful team you need to establish a culture wherein football is the priority. Attention to detail, making sure you're watching film, that sort of thing is how I interpret his words. and that ultimately that is necessary to make sure you carry out your strategy to maximum effect. I pointed out earlier, and will do so here, that if you look at successful franchises in different sports you see that having a specific culture and mindset is associated with success. In basketball you look at guys like Jordan and Bird. They were dedicated to a winning culture, worked harder than any other guy on the team at practice, demanded excellence from their teammates. Very successful teams. The Canadiens back in the day under Toe Blake. They had a culture that demanded the same, and they dominated hockey for well over a decade. The Niners with Montana and Rice. Talented guys but dedicated to a culture promulgated by Walsh. There are many examples of this. YOua ctually want talented guys like this that establish a winning culture, not guys who defy a winning culture. McD has a vision of how to build a successful team, and culture is an important part of that. I would argue it is for any organization. Does it mean you ignore talent or strategy? of course not. But if you have a talented person who is disruptive of the culture, ultimately it doesn't help the team.

I asked earlier for anyone to name a successful organization of any kind that has not established a set culture. No one has come up with one yet. Not do I suspect they will. Because successful organizations spend a lot of time on defining their culture. I also noted that McD never said that culture and things like talent are mutually exclusive. Yet you have those who just like to bark at the moon saying this must be what he meant. Which of course is nonsense.

You clearly have no clue what constitutes a successful organization.

Culture is essential to any successful organization. So is talent. So is strategy. But the culture leaders set in place helps define strategy and helps identify and nurture talent. If you are on a management position you know that. I work for a health care organization with around 15 k employees. We have a culture that is focused on one thing: the patient. That drives all we do. As for strategy all of those are planned with the cultural imperative of what is best for the patient. Talent? We attract talented people because they are attracted to our culture and buy in. We spend a lot of time on our top 10-20% of performers thanking them. We spend even more time with our 60-70% who need some development or that haven't fully bought in. We want them to be in that top 10-20%. Our lowest 10%, the ones who complain all the time, low performers, etc.? We spend no time with them, other than to escort them to the door. And as our culture fully integrates, we don't really have that bottom 10% issue very much. At this point they have gone on to poison other organizations, and we attract those who appreciate and buy into our way of doing things. All successful organizations require a solid culture. Including football teams. That is what McD is saying, I believe. It does not replace the need for talent or strategy, but it sets the tone whereby talent can come to the forefront and where strategies can be implemented with clarity of purpose. His idea of culture from what I see is a dedication to maximum effort, from the number one guy on the team to the practice squad. That is a sound method IMHO. Look at other successful sports franchises. Jordan won multiple titles in the NBA, so did Larry Bird, Magic. All of those guys practiced as hard if not harder than they played in games, held their teammates to that standard. Three guys among the best to ever play but they led cultures that demanded excellence. There's a reason Iverson never won anything. i am glad we have a HC with that mindset. No it does not mean they can win devoid of talent or strategy. Those claiming he said that are living in an all too common world now where everything has to be a black or white, either/or answer, when the world actually exists in greys. Does it mean he doesn't have to get more alienated guys at several positions? Of course not. But having a solid culture will ultimately help the players and the team be successful, as most any successful organization will tell you. Not alienated guys, talented guys. He'll bring in more talented guys, and the culture should allow them to thrive.

Linemen first. Build from inside out

He can't or won't. I've asked him to do so twice

My bad

Posing an either/or question on a false premise doesn't have merit.

People keep saying he wants culture over talent. He said no such thing.

I know of no successful organizations that do not have a successful culture. When he says culture trumps strategy it means you can have the best plays called, best coaching, etc. but if guys aren't committed to work and improvement it won't mean much. I note some here saying he does not want talent. That is nowhere to be found in his statement. His and Beane's jobs are to bring talent in and mold it into a successful team. But if the talent is not part of a broader success mindset and culture the talent will not be as successful as it should be.

Facts are difficult things for some. Like blaming Beane for Woods leaving in free agency when he wasn't even here. i continue to say this: McD and Beane have a plan and I will judge their success or failure on how they carry out their plan. They picked their QB and next year can bring in a tonbofbguys. If they picked the right QB and get the right guys they'll succeed. If not then they'll be looking for work. As it should be. hardly "glowingly positive". Not now. When you jump back on in a year. And we'll welcome you back.

And I'm sure you'll jump right back on the bandwagon when they play better, right?