Is Philbin to "Old White Business Man" for today's NFL Players? AKA Will they buy in?

Too old white Business Man? Nah.

Too creature from Pan's Labyrinth?



Perhaps...

 

agreed i think it his last year with us, also we have that guy who CK is high on in jonas gray sitting on the PUP

 

I don't think that's true. Coughlin went through a purge where he got rid of guys like Plaxico Burress and Jeremy Shockey because he didn't like how they were affecting the locker room.

 

As I said, "we only see snippets of things that Hard Knocks shows and it may not be the whole picture." I simply expressed my impression formed as a result of it. We all look at things differently. If I was a the head coach I would have no interest or inclination to spend time and energy critiquing the players' attire or picking up tiny scraps of trash. I tend to think there are more important things to be done and said out on the practice field. And even if that is not the case (even though I am pretty sure it is), it could very well give the impression to the players (or at least some of them) that Philbin is needlessly focused on insignificant minutiae instead of the things that matter.

 

I'm a bit confused as to how his style will work, what I do like is holding these athletes accountable if their not willing to take their craft serious.

 

He was known as a players coach coming out of the Packers.

 

A: He is asking a question, he is not being negative.

B: You should know negative posts, that's all you did last year.

 

Short of RT there is nobody on this team that they could cut or trade that I would give a rats *** about. On paper and through the pre-season they look to be underacheivers, not NFL caliper talent or a bunch or cry babies more worried about giving one of their boys another chance rather than stepping up and saying he ****ed up. I'll give Philben this year to weed out these guys and put together his team for next year.

 

and i give you another post to get the name of our HC right....

 

Maybe, but it is a very different role. As OC, he could play the role of the benign and mildly eccentric OCD grandfather (that's just kinda how I see him) who players may have felt was an advocate for them after getting tough love from Daddy (McCarthy). Now Philbin is the Daddy and the face of the franchise. They get the tough love from the coordinators (e.g., Sherman telling Egnew he would cut him if he were the GM) and position coaches (e.g., Turner's controntational nature (I like him BTW)) and Philbin may come across as just a cold and aloof old guy who chastizes them for wearing watches or having their shoes untied.

It does seem like some people do like his personality, but does anyone view him as someone they'd really want to fight for or go to war with?

 

Philbin is not the problem. But if you had said Coyle or Sherman then yeah, I would agree with you. Sherman has been canned several times for good reason and he will be canned here sooner rather then later.

 

Don't forget, Philbin also has an OC, DC, and staff of positional coaches to help balance everything out. Has no one seen our TE & Oline coach for example?

 

But the funny thing is that any elite player gets there by focusing on and practicing the minutiae of his game.

Joe Philbin's concern with detail isn't at all inconsistent with his focus on professionalism, nor with the brand of professionalism (i.e., focusing on detail) elite players show in reaching that level.

The key is to get a critical mass of the roster (and leaders) in line with that, which will form a team culture consistent with it.

Then while Joe Philbin is picking up scraps of paper, half the guys on his roster will be similarly focusing on the detail of their game, and nothing will seem amiss.

 

Where did you get that from?

Do you want this organization being represented by players dropping expletives left and right during press conferences? I sure don't, and that's all he was referring to regarding the language. Heck, he brought in a hilarious, potty mouthed oline coach did he not?

I'm not sure how he seems restrictedly straight laced when he's allowing the guys to carry out their hazing and perform a non straight laced rookie talent show. So far it doesn't seem like he's imposing on the team outside of what he's expecting from them in regards to winning. He didn't even have a problem with Chad Johnson's painted nails, correct?

 

Sherman got canned from A@M more for his recruiting style, which left a lot to be desired, and as far as his team's play the problem was always the defense. His offenses carried his teams while he was there.

He lead the Packers to five consecutive winning records and three division titles. He got canned there after one losing season, but overall he was pretty successful. At any rate he's the OC, not the head coach.

 

But the snippets we are talking about have absolutely nothign to do with the minutiae of the game or the players' positions. It is nonsense about dress code and litter. And no, it is not a hallmark of great players to be focused on dress code and litter.

In my field there are lots of people that are very focused on details. But some details matter and some don't. The lawyers I know who obsess over minutiae like the angle of the staple in the corner of the page or the type of paper used generally (no, always) suck. Nobody has the capacity to focus on every single detail and give each one appropriate attention. They get sidetracked with insignificant things and waste tons of time on things that simply don't matter and that causes them to lose focus on what does matter. And it causes the people working under them to get similarly sidetracked and frustrated. When Philbin is having those chats about dress code, isn't there some kind of meaningful comment on the player's technique, effort, or motivation that would be more productive? Don't you think the players would appreciate that more too?

 

I was making that exact point in my head. Being aware of details is good .. but what details? Bill Belichick is obsessed with situations. Always throwing out situations at his players to see their answer. and it shows on the practice field. Philbin is worried about candy wrappers.

of course we base this observation on what HBO decides to show us, so perhaps we don't have the big picture. We'll see.

 

Why would you care if a player or players drop the F word or whatever during a press conference? You think that reflects bad on you somehow, like fans of other teams will look down at you? I would think having a team that is horrible would be more embarrassing. Some of you fans are way to involved in this team. Its entertainment. Nothing more. I couldn't care less what the players say or do off the field. I have 16,hopefully 19 Weeks out of the year to watch my favorite sport and root for my favorite team. I dont care what they do as long as they win.

 

I do like and applaud Philbin for the double-tracked practice format. But in a way it highlights this other concern, in that it is based on the acceptance of the idea that there is limited practice time available. So, as you say about Belichick, use every minute you can to make a meaningful teaching point and to make it clear to the players that what matters is what is happening on the field.

 

I don't think Philbin is exhibiting the quantity or the quality of the obssessiveness you're talking about here.

 

lol @ the thread title. Not gonna even begin to get in to this one.

 

The truth is neither one of us knows. We are basing our judgments off what Hard Knocks has elected to show us. But they showed several instances (3-4) of pretty obsessive behavior. Maybe that si all their was, but I doubt it. There was presumably enough of it to make the producers think that was something worth highlighting.

 

I agree with the OP to some extent like for example in HK after the rookie talent show, when Ireland comes in to tell Philbin about how it went and the first thing he says is was it clean? Sometimes I think he needs to focus more on the game plan rather than how the players speak amongst themselves.

And for the others talking about he's not young or able to relate to his players enough, how'd that work out for Rahim Morris?

 

But even if that's his typical way of being, it still can't be deemed something that interferes with life or his job IMO. What we're seeing from him there is a trait of conscientiousness or perfectionsim, not the kind of compulsive rituals you'd see with someone with OCD.

Now, there is the danger that with people who focus on fine details, the bigger picture will be lost. But there is also the possibility that the person can see both. Philbin's ability to consider the big picture of the final roster while talking to Bush and company about the details of the leadership council suggests to me he has the ability to see both, and perhaps the exceptional ability to do so in the moment, to pan back and forth between them, even while engaged in a novel, rather weighty discussion such as that one.

 

we certainly don't have enough info to say it doesn't interfere with how he does his job. He's never done this job before. And although it is early, the early indications are not that encouraging. I'm not pretending to diagnose him with OCD in a serious way. I am simply suggesting that, to my eyes, he seems like someone who seems a little preoccupied with stuff that doesn't matter much (if at all). I didn't see any special ability to see the big picture from that conversation about the leadership council.

 

The fact that he was able to consider the details of the council (i.e., how it would operate), while also considering the big picture of the meaning of when it would be implemented in relation to the final roster (i.e., down the road, after the cut down to 53), IMO demonstrates the ability to pan back and forth between the little and the big picture, even in the moment, which is rare. That's a man whose mind is working on all cylinders.

 

Meh. Didn't seem that impressive to me. And I think you are attributing a level of contemplation that wasn't necessarily there. All we really know is that the players said they wanted to have a leadership council and he said he wasn't opposed to the idea but that they should wait until after the final cuts to discuss it again. I don't necessarily see that as any different than a kid asking his mother for ice cream and the mother saying "not now, but we'll talk about it again after dinner."

 

The difference is that this discussion was a novel and weighty one, where those factors alone can detract from many people's cognitive ability. Their clear thinking can simply be blocked by the anxiety associated with the novelty and the weight of the situation. Those features aren't present when contemplating whether to give your kid ice cream, which you've presumably done a million times with a very familiar person (your kid), with nothing major riding on it (like the development of Philbin's relationships with his players, on the heels of their asking for this meeting).

So he has a novel and weighty situation he's in the middle of, and not only does he calmly execute the whole thing from his end, but he also shows the ability to discuss the details of the council and how it will operate, while considering the big picture in terms of when to implement it. My take on it is that he figured that implementing it before the cut down to 53 would have some meaning associated with it that would be significantly different than it would have after the final cut down.

Regardless, the point is that he panned back and forth between the big and little picture in the midst of a very novel and weighty discussion. That isn't easy, and it certainly isn't easily or typically done by someone who gets lost in details at the expense of the big picture.

 

I think they will buy into his system/style pretty soon. I don't think it will be as difficult or whatever it is to buy into it. If they want to buy into it they will. I don't think it will be a problem though.

 

I dont see a problem with position coaches talking to their player before the head coach does.Thats called delegation in my world at least.

And BTW if you want to talk about aloof Saban was a master at it .He had all sorts of hurdles and minders to get through before anyone could talk to him.

 

Thank you for clarifying that repeatedly dropping F-bombs correlates to winning. Learn something new everyday.


It says a lot about a person if they believe it's ok to represent their company/organization in a highly unprofessional manner.

 

Tie your damn shoes

 

The thread was dead upon posting....

"Too old white business man"? Really?
Ridiculous....

 

It's called chain of command as well.
Way it should be.
Your example of Saban is right on the money.

 

I see the sorceror from Game of Thrones

 

#tiedlacesCHAMPIONSHIP!

 

I think what works in New England is the players' perception that Belichick is very intelligent, on top of his game, and doing more than enough on his end to put them in position to win. That allows them to have the kind of faith in the coaching staff that gets them on board and makes them feel it's incumbent on them to win games. In other words, they believe the coaches are doing their part, which puts the responsibility on them to do their part to win.

Assuming a team's roster is filled with professionals who are willing and capable of assuming that kind of responsibility (which is what Philbin is striving for here), what I described above is all a coaching staff needs to do to win in this league IMO. The fiery, motivational stuff is done by leaders among the players IMO.

In fact, I think a head coach who does too much fiery, motivational stuff can get in the way of the leaders among the players. The coach just needs to make sure he's on top of his game with regard to coaching, and let the leaders among the players do the motivational stuff.

Now, the head coach also needs to have his finger on the pulse of the leadership among his players and make roster moves and other decisions with that in mind. But in the end, the winning teams have coaches who coach, and leaders among the players who lead and motivate.