Sean McDermott: "Culture Trumps Strategy" ?​​​​​​​

[PlayoffsPlease]

28 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:

Allen, Edmunds, Star, Phillips, Kyle Williams, Dion Dawkins, Hyde, Poyer, Milano, Tre White.

What characteristics about those players makes your say that.  It just seems like a list of players that are not well below average players talent wise. 

[PlayoffsPlease]

2 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

This is exactly where I'm at. 

 

Theyd be MUCH better off with Sammy and Dareus at their current contracts then Star and KB at THEIR current contracts. 

 

They would STILL have plenty of cap space and a more talented roster. 

We would miss KBs work ethic and commitment as part of the culture building process. 

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, ScottLaw said:

Is there any evidence of this at all?

Yep.

[The Frankish Reich]

On 10/3/2018 at 9:49 AM, 26CornerBlitz said:

I don't buy this. 

I don't know about culture and strategy. I do know about talent. Maybe that's what we should focus on first. I could make up some Lombardi-Woodenism like "Culture is the catalyst that turns talent into success." It would be marvelously vague and perfect for those inspirational office posters everyone mocks. But the real question is this: hasn't McD gotten like ten times weirder looking in his year and a half in Buffalo? The creepily long forehead is creepily longer. The pasty white skin is a pastier kind of pasty.

[K-9]

Folks aren't appreciating the depths to which the relationship between Dareus and McBeane had deteriorated. A divorce was inevitable and I'm not sure it was as easy to just have him hang around as some might think. Especially in light of a new staff with new standards, etc. trying to establish a certain order. 

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

This is exactly where I'm at. 

 

Theyd be MUCH better off with Sammy and Dareus at their current contracts then Star and KB at THEIR current contracts. 

 

They would STILL have plenty of cap space and a more talented roster. 

 

Heck, Sammy would still be in his option year, just like benjamin. So a little more there as Sammy was top 10 in the draft, but dareus instead of starr would’ve saved substantially. We would have more cap space I believe, without a formal double check. 

 

Don’t make the Sammy trade, and you likely don’t do the Darby trade - which again gives us a better player and cheap. 

 

Wed be down a 2nd round pick overall but have more cap and more talent. Could use a different pick for the allen trade and spend the cap space on a good vet to replace the missing draft pick (or have picked mahomes)

 

I accept there are differing opinions on some of these guys but this narrative floating around that there was absolutely no option for beane to run a different course irks me.

19 minutes ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

We would miss KBs work ethic and commitment as part of the culture building process. 

 

Bright side: I think we might’ve given him a big free agent deal if we didn’t trade for him. He easily could’ve been a FA target next year but I think we let him walk now

[NoSaint]

8 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

It's just an excuse for them. Nothing more.

 

The argument with Darby is he doesn't fit the "zone" scheme. I say bull ****. A good coach works their scheme to what his players do best. Especially a solid one like Darby.

A solid corner with a 2 year 1.8m contract is legit the type of things dreams should be made of for an nfl team. Instead, we almost paid Gaines/vontae a combined 2 year 6.8m

 

toss that $5m at a line upgrade, and the dareus/Starr savings at a WR (which also would’ve avoided the Coleman dead money) 

 

the ripples are always interesting to contemplate 

[YoloinOhio]

3 hours ago, dickleyjones said:

no i'm saying that culture is a part of strategy. there is no trumping involved.

It is to a degree. 

Strategy = What you want to do.

Culture = What you’re willing to do.

Execution is the intersection of culture and strategy.

Edited October 5, 2018 by YoloinOhio

[Ol Dirty B]

11 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Sorry but you're wrong again.  A non-profit health care organization first of all.  Second our culture is simple: it's about the patient.  We pursue a ton of strategies such as smiling when with patients, making sure they can get into a doc's office with 24 hours, many others.  But every single strategy is influenced by having a culture where the needs of the patient are placed first.

 

You bring up the Rams.  Is their success culture or strategy?  And why do they have to be mutually exclusive?

 

 

Oh, now I get all of this, you work for a nonprofit. Now it makes total sense.

[Thurman#1]

7 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

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.

 

 

 

Good post.

[Ol Dirty B]

1 minute ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

Good post.

 

Have you read ScottLaw and NoSaints posts in this thread?

 

They pretty much refute everything you've been saying about Darby, or do we ignore those?

[Thurman#1]

5 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

It's just an excuse for them. Nothing more.

 

The argument with Darby is he doesn't fit the "zone" scheme. I say bull ****. A good coach works their scheme to what his players do best. Especially a solid one like Darby.

 

 

Plenty of good coaches only pick players who fit their scheme. Belichick, for instance.

 

And it's probably not a mistake that the team that picked up Darby fit him into a zone scheme.

3 minutes ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

Have you read ScottLaw and NoSaints posts in this thread?

 

They pretty much refute everything you've been saying about Darby, or do we ignore those?

 

 

I certainly did see them ... try ... to refute everything.

 

But let's face it, they're agreeing with you, and while ScottLaw and NoSaints are both good posters, the fact that they're agreeing with a prize troll on this issue means they're likely on the wrong side in this case.

[Ol Dirty B]

1 minute ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Plenty of good coaches only pick players who fit their scheme. Belichick, for instance.

 

And it's probably not a mistake that the team that picked up Darby fit him into a zone scheme.

 

Belichick has changed schemes continually. They went from a run heavy offense, to airing it out, to getting Moss, to going spread and running dink and dunk passes all over to negate the lack of the running game.

 

Belichick is the worst example you could bring up. He has always been evolving.

3 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Plenty of good coaches only pick players who fit their scheme. Belichick, for instance.

 

And it's probably not a mistake that the team that picked up Darby fit him into a zone scheme.

 

 

I certainly did see them ... try ... to refute everything.

 

But let's face it, they're agreeing with you, and while ScottLaw and NoSaints are both good posters, the fact that they're agreeing with a prize troll on this issue means they're likely on the wrong side in this case.

 

I'm a troll because I don't like what they are doing? That's pretty convenient. Doesn't McDermott run a zone scheme? I thought Darby was drafted to play man under rex? 

 

I'm the troll? Gaines was brought in and he played well because he'd fit a zone scheme better. But whatever... I guess you just say whatever and it becomes fact.

[Thurman#1]

8 hours ago, NoSaint said:

Right, I get that but if we dump the savings straight into the cheaper option- suddenly the cap hit is the same as keeping dareus and frankly even if he’s a pain to manage he’s better than the $3m guy even on his worst days and comes with upside.

 

we decided rather than managing the situation, to simultaneously shed talent and increase spending. Dareus better have been openly mocking coaches in meetings for that to be the answer.

 

 

Easy to say that when you're not the guy managing that talent. McDermott is. That explains why Dareus is gone. The guy couldn't even be on time for buses, much less meetings.

 

And cutting Dareus meant spending more this year and less after ... just in line with their goals, having promised the owner that they would clear up the cap situation by the end of this season.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

11 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

Who's fault is it that they have $53+ million in dead cap space and gaping holes on both sides of the ball?

 

Keeping Dareus would have kept them from being "gashed in the run game" last year and this -- and cut their dead cap space to about $40 million.  Wood was 30 in 2017, and Incognito was 34 or 35.  Maybe they should have drafted an OLer with the extra pick they gave up to move up to take Jones and taken some other WR -- I believe that Smith-Shuster might have still been available when the Bills would have picked.  Groy was a career backup, but the reason he "fell apart" is likely because he's not playing the same blocking scheme that he played in 2016 when he looked at least semi-competent.  That's on the coaching staff because it seems apparent that the Bills OLers still haven't come close to mastering the zone blocking system.

 

 

It's the fault of being still early in a rebuild ... a rebuild during which the owner exacted a promise to clean up the salary cap morass by the end of this year.

 

That dead cap space looks awful this year and terrific next year.

 

I personally don't see a lot of gaping holes on the defense. Certainly still room for improvement, but "gaping holes"? I don't see it on defense. On offense, yeah. That tends to happen, though, that a new coach prioritizes the side of the ball that he specializes in.

 

And yeah, Smith-Schuster would've been an improvement over Zay, or so it looks so far. But the rest of that draft looks damn good. Tre' White at #27? Dawkins in the 3rd, trading up to get him? Looks very smart in retrospect. Milano in the 5th? Even Peterman in the 5th might easily turn out to be a good pick if he ends up as a long-time backup, here or elsewhere, though it's far from sure that will happen. You can't blame them for the Zay Jones pick without also praising them for White, Dawkins and Milano. And that was all before Beane even came on board.

 

 

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

It's the fault of being still early in a rebuild ... a rebuild during which the owner exacted a promise to clean up the salary cap morass by the end of this year.

 

That dead cap space looks awful this year and terrific next year.

 

I personally don't see a lot of gaping holes on the defense. Certainly still room for improvement, but "gaping holes"? I don't see it on defense. On offense, yeah. That tends to happen, though, that a new coach prioritizes the side of the ball that he specializes in.

 

And yeah, Smith-Schuster would've been an improvement over Zay, or so it looks so far. But the rest of that draft looks damn good. Tre' White at #27? Dawkins in the 3rd, trading up to get him? Looks very smart in retrospect. Milano in the 5th? Even Peterman in the 5th might easily turn out to be a good pick if he ends up as a long-time backup, here or elsewhere, though it's far from sure that will happen. You can't blame them for the Zay Jones pick without also praising them for White, Dawkins and Milano. And that was all before Beane even came on board.

 

 

 

I don't buy your excuses. 

 

First off, where did you get the info that Pegula "exacted a promise to clean up the salary cap morass by the end of this year"?  This is the first I've heard or seen a reference to anything such promise but maybe I missed this tasty gossip tidbit.  Do you mean that maybe Pegula "exacted a promise to cut player salary cost by $x million by the end of 2018" since the Bills have one of the lowest, if not the lowest, actual player payrolls in the NFL primarily because they got rid of virtually all of their higher paid players and replaced them with bottom-feeder vets and rookies.  Wood and maybe the strange situation with Incognito can be dismissed as "unforeseen" but all the other players who left the team were either not re-signed in FA (Gilmore, Goodwin, Wood) or traded away, resulting in huge savings in current salary but adding tens of millions to the dead cap space (which doesn't actually count against the Bills profitability).

 

If you like what you've seen on defense so far, who am I to think you should expect more?  I certainly do.  The defense has looked better than the offense but that doesn't mean that it's all that good because the offense isn't even professional caliber.

 

Aside from White, who from the 2017 draft is truly NFL starting caliber?  Dawkins and Milano are starting because there's nobody better on the team.  My guess is that they wouldn't be starters on most NFL teams, and Milano might not even make many teams regular rosters.  As for Peterman, he's a waste of a roster spot, and your defense of him seems to indicate that you live in a fantasy world where every crappy pick/bottom feeder vet that McDermott and Beane foist on the team is a good choice.

 

Since you like to accuse anybody who disagrees with your blind worship of McDermott and Beane as being a "troll", I have to ask: are you McDermott's mom or one of the Pegula's kids?

 

7 hours ago, K-9 said:

Folks aren't appreciating the depths to which the relationship between Dareus and McBeane had deteriorated. A divorce was inevitable and I'm not sure it was as easy to just have him hang around as some might think. Especially in light of a new staff with new standards, etc. trying to establish a certain order. 

 

McDermott and Beane seem to have real problems with their relationships with really talented players who are well-paid or who expect to be paid what they're worth.  Meanwhile, coaches like Belichick, McVay, and Marrone seem to be able to build bridges to really talented players like Josh Gordon, Sammy Watkins, and Marcel Dareus.

Edited October 5, 2018 by SoTier

[oldmanfan]

28 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

I don't buy your excuses. 

 

First off, where did you get the info that Pegula "exacted a promise to clean up the salary cap morass by the end of this year"?  This is the first I've heard or seen a reference to anything such promise but maybe I missed this tasty gossip tidbit.  Do you mean that maybe Pegula "exacted a promise to cut player salary cost by $x million by the end of 2018" since the Bills have one of the lowest, if not the lowest, actual player payrolls in the NFL primarily because they got rid of virtually all of their higher paid players and replaced them with bottom-feeder vets and rookies.  Wood and maybe the strange situation with Incognito can be dismissed as "unforeseen" but all the other players who left the team were either not re-signed in FA (Gilmore, Goodwin, Wood) or traded away, resulting in huge savings in current salary but adding tens of millions to the dead cap space (which doesn't actually count against the Bills profitability).

 

If you like what you've seen on defense so far, who am I to think you should expect more?  I certainly do.  The defense has looked better than the offense but that doesn't mean that it's all that good because the offense isn't even professional caliber.

 

Aside from White, who from the 2017 draft is truly NFL starting caliber?  Dawkins and Milano are starting because there's nobody better on the team.  My guess is that they wouldn't be starters on most NFL teams, and Milano might not even make many teams regular rosters.  As for Peterman, he's a waste of a roster spot, and your defense of him seems to indicate that you live in a fantasy world where every crappy pick/bottom feeder vet that McDermott and Beane foist on the team is a good choice.

 

Since you like to accuse anybody who disagrees with your blind worship of McDermott and Beane as being a "troll", I have to ask: are you McDermott's mom or one of the Pegula's kids?

 

 

McDermott and Beane seem to have real problems with their relationships with really talented players who are well-paid or who expect to be paid what they're worth.  Meanwhile, coaches like Belichick, McVay, and Marrone seem to be able to build bridges to really talented players like Josh Gordon, Sammy Watkins, and Marcel Dareus.

McVay built such a great bridge with Sammy they kept him for one year and weren't interested in resigning him.  Dareus has like 9 tackles in 4 games this year.  Gordon has played one game in NE and that means Belichick has built a bridge?  Watch that"bridge" crumble if and when Gordon screws up again.

 

Oh, and Milano?  Defensive player of the week two weeks ago.  I think a lot of teams would be happy to have him.

 

Finally, cap space.  They made a commitment to get out from under contracts that were weighing down the team.  Dareus being the prime example.  You don't give a huge contract to a guy half assing it through games.

[dickleyjones]

7 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

It is to a degree. 

Strategy = What you want to do.

Culture = What you’re willing to do.

Execution is the intersection of culture and strategy.

sounds reasonable, i agree it is all closely tied. maybe more accurate would be:

 

Strategy = What you want to do overall, which includes:

Culture = What you want your guys to be willing to do

Tactics = What you want your guys to do

and execution is the intersection of culture and tactics.

 

 

[Julio Hopkins]

18 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

McVay built such a great bridge with Sammy they kept him for one year and weren't interested in resigning him.  Dareus has like 9 tackles in 4 games this year.  Gordon has played one game in NE and that means Belichick has built a bridge?  Watch that"bridge" crumble if and when Gordon screws up again.

 

Oh, and Milano?  Defensive player of the week two weeks ago.  I think a lot of teams would be happy to have him.

 

Finally, cap space.  They made a commitment to get out from under contracts that were weighing down the team.  Dareus being the prime example.  You don't give a huge contract to a guy half assing it through games.

 

The Rams did try to sign Sammy, they valued what he brought to the offense.  McVay immediately replaced Sammy with Cooks, because McVay understands how to build an effective offense.  By the way McVay proves everything McDermott believes is wrong.  Probably shouldn't bring his name up, seeing as he's the best argument against McDermott.  

 

I'm sure LA fans are sitting in worry about their cap space and lack of draft picks though.  

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Julio Hopkins said:

 

The Rams did try to sign Sammy, they valued what he brought to the offense.  McVay immediately replaced Sammy with Cooks, because McVay understands how to build an effective offense.  By the way McVay proves everything McDermott believes is wrong.  Probably shouldn't bring his name up, seeing as he's the best argument against McDermott.  

 

I'm sure LA fans are sitting in worry about their cap space and lack of draft picks though.  

What are you trying to say about him being the anti- McD?  You think McVay hasn't established a culture for his team?  I highly doubt that.  As for fans worrying about their cap situation and lack of picks, the've gone all in on winning this year or next year.  Then their team will get broken up, when they have to pay Goff and others.  And we'll see what happens to them then. 

 

I liked Sammy, wish he were still here.  But not at 15 million a year.  He's done nothing to support that.  And with the Chiefs in 4 games so far he has 14 catches for 176 yards and 1 TD.  That's just not enough production to merit the huge contract.