On The Topic of Leadership

[Alexander]

ENGCowboy's post in another thread inspired me and I was curious to see others thoughts (and ridicule them if necessary):

Yeah I totally understand just would like to hear of something along those lines happening at the Ranch, its a case of players taking responsibility for themselves as you say but also taking responsibility for each other and thats what I havnt heard any of yet.

The above quote came from a discussion about Tony Romo and why exactly he isn't doing what Peyton Manning is doing by calling teammates and rallying them to attend offseason programs.

My view is that it is not his place. Not yet.

But overall that points back to the dynamic of leadership.

Not a one of these players has hit on what it is like to be accountable for each other yet (or themselves) and how important that is. Eventually, winners will have a breakthrough. Someone will have a meltdown and say enough is enough. Then they go out on the field, get a big win and build off of it. Once that happens, then the winning can start.

But how many times did we win a "big game" and come out flat the following week? Why could we never establish momentum? We had it briefly riding the Romo Express until Thanksgiving. Then everything derailed. And nobody, including the coaches, could get it completely right.

Someone has to do more than talk. Newman hit on it last year.

We have paper leaders who say the right things, appear to do the right things, but aren't winners who actually do them.

That is an important part of leadership and why we really don't have any.

I watched America's Game with the 1974 Steelers last night. Now, everyone knew their defense carried them. But even that wasn't enough. It wasn't until a sick of losing Joe Greene packed up his locker and basically left the team that they pulled together as a team and decided they wanted to win as badly as he did.

Our veterans should be emotional. I don't care about any of this "you don't have to be a screamer" rhetoric. Find me a quality leader in this emotional game that isn't. Even supposedly "quiet" leaders have an aura of intensity about them that simply cannot be ignored.

What Cowboy has that? Certainly not any of our supposed leaders, many of which aren't even participating right now.

I have hope for Romo, I really do. I think Hamlin has great potential.

But a lack of leadership, more than scheme, more than bad coaching, is what doomed the Bill Parcells era.

He was our leader. If someone thought the Dallas Cowboys, what dominant personality emerged. Nobody stepped up and modeled his ethic. Everyone was content to let him take the heat (and I am sure he partially wanted it that way). There were a few that tried, but were laughably bad at it. I expected a few more players to blossom now that they no longer have his shadow in front of them and I have yet to see it.

Until we see this leadership emerge, I doubt we win another playoff game, let alone a championship.

 

[ZeroClub]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1508724&postcount=24

I'm generally pro-Parcells - on balance, I think he helped the franchise. I certainly don't see him as a failure. Enjoyed his press conferences quite a bit. And had a lot of respect for him.

But I have a little pet theory about team leadership and Parcells. - That Parcells had such a vice-like grip on the team, kept things so tense, rigid, rule-bound, that it was difficult for team leaders to emerge. That there wasn't enough room left for team leaders.

Just idle speculation on my part.

But my guess is that team leaders will become more apparent under Phillips.

 

[Alexander]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1508724&postcount=24

I'm generally pro-Parcells - on balance, I think he helped the franchise. I certainly don't see him as a failure. Enjoyed his press conferences quite a bit. And had a lot of respect for him.

But I have a little pet theory about team leadership and Parcells. - That Parcells had such a vice-like grip on the team, kept things so tense, rigid, rule-bound, that it was difficult for team leaders to emerge. That there wasn't enough room left for team leaders.

Just idle speculation on my part.

But my guess is that team leaders will become more apparent under Phillips.

I actually can believe the Parcells aura could drown out potential leaders.

But our leaders (i.e. Greg Ellis, Roy Williams) were here before him and weren't a rousing success then either. Someone has to step up. If not, we will continue to flounder.

 

[bbgun]

Romo doesn't have the "gravitas" yet. Nor should he have to telephone grown men and tell them to take their jobs seriously.

 

[Alexander]

Romo doesn't have the "gravitas" yet. Nor should he have to telephone grown men and tell them to take their jobs seriously.

I don't quite understand this "grown man" business.

Why is it most of the time when someone says they want to be treated like it, their behavior belies it?

 

[AbeBeta]

I actually can believe the Parcells aura could drown out potential leaders.

But our leaders (i.e. Greg Ellis, Roy Williams) were here before him and weren't a rousing success then either. Someone has to step up. If not, we will continue to flounder.

Excellent posts.

One place where I see the problem was with Darren Woodson. Woody was the undisputed leader on D. After his first season however, prior to the 2004 season, he got hurt and started the year on the PUP list.

His teammates assumed he'd be coming back and that caused a void in leadership -- guys weren't stepping up because they thought Woody was going to be coming back.

That's where the problem started on the D.

After that, we kind of got victimized by two things. First, a focus on character and second the change of defense. We've drafted for high character and focused on good character FAs (for the most part). I support that -- however, often high character also means sort of quiet and unassuming. The young guys with the most leadership potential (Burnett, Ratliff, Carpenter, etc.) don't play much so can't lead. Guys like Ware, Newman, and Henry all are quiet by nature.

Switching Ds compounded the problem -- few players feel comfortable leading if they are still learning the nuances of the D.

 

[ZeroClub]

I actually can believe the Parcells aura could drown out potential leaders.

But our leaders (i.e. Greg Ellis, Roy Williams) were here before him and weren't a rousing success then either. Someone has to step up. If not, we will continue to flounder.

Before Parcells. Hmm. I'd guess Woodson. Maybe Glover. I assume that Emmitt Smith must have commanded much respect.

I have few fond memories of the Campo years, but one positive was that the players almost always played hard. Despite their overall lack of success, I was typically impressed with the pride and effort of those teams. So I'd assume that there was some high quality team leadership going on behind the scenes ....

 

[Alexander]

Before Parcells. Hmm. I'd guess Woodson. Maybe Glover. I assume that Emmitt Smith must have commanded much respect.

I have few fond memories of the Campo years, but one positive was that the players almost always played hard. Despite their overall lack of success, I was typically impressed with the pride and effort of those teams. So I'd assume that there was some high quality team leadership going on behind the scenes ....

They did play hard. But eventually they just folded for whatever reason. We had an opportunity to win a lot more games than just five a season. As bad as that talent was, we were in position to win as many as two to three more games a season. But we'd make some horrific coaching decision or simply give up one big play more than the opposition.

Woodson was a leader, but he too was more of the Ellis-type of leader. I cannot say he was truly intense. He had an incredible work ethic and sometimes that is not enough. Fear also plays a role, like or not. People feared Irvin or Haley breathing down their necks if they slacked. I liken it to doing the chores so you can avoid the nagging. Eventually you find that doing the chores is beneficial and do it because of your own feelings of self-satisfaction. We still were coping with the nagging from Coach Parcells last year. We probably will need a nag amongst the players.

 

[jackrussell]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1508724&postcount=24

I'm generally pro-Parcells - on balance, I think he helped the franchise. I certainly don't see him as a failure. Enjoyed his press conferences quite a bit. And had a lot of respect for him.

But I have a little pet theory about team leadership and Parcells. - That Parcells had such a vice-like grip on the team, kept things so tense, rigid, rule-bound, that it was difficult for team leaders to emerge. That there wasn't enough room left for team leaders.

Just idle speculation on my part.

But my guess is that team leaders will become more apparent under Phillips.

Let's say this is true.

And being true, that's when you REALLY could have had someone emerge as a team leader. Someone that would have had the kahonas to break through the 'vice-like grip' would have unquestionably attained his teammates attention and esteem.

Not neccessarily a "when they said sit down I stood up" type of guy....but more of a "tread lightly with a big stick" guy.

 

[ZeroClub]

Excellent posts.

One place where I see the problem was with Darren Woodson. Woody was the undisputed leader on D. After his first season however, prior to the 2004 season, he got hurt and started the year on the PUP list.

His teammates assumed he'd be coming back and that caused a void in leadership -- guys weren't stepping up because they thought Woody was going to be coming back.

That's where the problem started on the D.

After that, we kind of got victimized by two things. First, a focus on character and second the change of defense. We've drafted for high character and focused on good character FAs (for the most part). I support that -- however, often high character also means sort of quiet and unassuming. The young guys with the most leadership potential (Burnett, Ratliff, Carpenter, etc.) don't play much so can't lead. Guys like Ware, Newman, and Henry all are quiet by nature.

Switching Ds compounded the problem -- few players feel comfortable leading if they are still learning the nuances of the D.

I think Newman is in the process of stepping it up - asserting himself more. He's being quoted more often (if that means anything).

For a time, people saw Bradie James as an emerging team leader, but his somewhat disappointing level of play / mistakes may have undercut him.

I have hopes for Spencer as an emotional leader. Early reports characterize him as a high passion / high intensity / fire in his eyes kind of player (who is a nice and responsible guy off of the field).

Romo appears to be a fine emerging leader. If he backs it up by playing well on a consistent basis - his leadership ought to be quite good.

 

[Alexander]

Let's say this is true.

And being true, that's when you REALLY could have had someone emerge as a team leader. Someone that would have had the kahonas to break through the 'vice-like grip' would have unquestionably attained his teammates attention and esteem.

Not neccessarily a "when they said sit down I stood up" type of guy....but more of a "tread lightly with a big stick" guy.

It is all about personalities and peer pressure.

Let's assume several things here. And maybe (I stress maybe) there were several trains of thought in our lockerroom.

We had people who bought into the system because it worked before: Ferguson, T. Glenn, A. Glenn.

New "Parcells Guys" who "got it": Newman, Witten, Romo, Bradie James.

And some holdovers and malingerers who didn't: Ellis, Owens, Williams.

The one responsible for the fire-breathing was the head coach. No one was compelled to stand up consistently.

Some, like Newman, tried to step up and lieutenant. But lets understand that is not his personality. There was not a player on this team who had not only buy-in, but the psychological makeup to actually relish that role.

We are still in search of that personality. They are rare, but necessary IMO.

Look back at the great Cowboy teams and their makeup and think of it like a king's court.

Aikman: The aloof king.

Irvin, Haley: The enforcers.

Smith: The leader of the foot soldiers.

Who fills those roles now?

I am hard pressed to think of one.

 

[5Stars]

I think since the Cowboys have been a bad team for so long that the players really don't know or have the confidence to stand up and lead. I mean, how can you lead if you don't know what to do to win?

When the team starts to win a playoff game or two and get some confidence and the winning experience of how to actully achieve, then some leaders will most likely emerge.

Until then, I'm not sure any of them really know what it means to REALLY be a leader like the Cowboys had when they were winning SuperBowls. Winning cures alot of things...IMO.

 

[bbgun]

I don't quite understand this "grown man" business.

Why is it most of the time when someone says they want to be treated like it, their behavior belies it?

Beats me, but excellent use of the word "belies."

 

[Alexander]

Until then, I'm not sure any of them really know what it means to REALLY be a leader like the Cowboys had when they were winning SuperBowls. Winning cures alot of things...IMO.

Yes, and until there is a breakthrough and we can carry momentum from big wins and find ourselves, we will struggle.

 

[5Stars]

Yes, and until there is a breakthrough and we can carry momentum from big wins and find ourselves, we will struggle.

I agree...

For example, with this new scheme on defense, with Roy playing closer to the line using his natural ability to enforce havoc and make some great plays, perhaps his confidence at his new position might help him emerge as a leader.

I doubt Ware ever becomes a leader for the mere fact that he does not talk much trash on the field...Ferguson should be a leader, I don't know if he is or not. Perhaps Hamlin will come in and start a fire or two?

Romo has his part covered and he could become even more of a leader if the teams starts winning games...

Maybe the Cowboys should have kept Bryant? He was the only one to challenge Parcells!!

 

[burmafrd]

The other leader on D besides Woody was Dat. Losing him might have been a much bigger loss then originally thought.

 

[Alexander]

For example, with this new scheme on defense, with Roy playing closer to the line using his natural ability to enforce havoc and make some great plays, perhaps his confidence at his new position might help him emerge as a leader.

I strongly doubt he is cut from the right cloth psychologically to hold that role. I don't think he wants it. Simply put, he had a chance to step into that role for several years and he failed to do it. I don't believe he wants it, nor is it important for him to have.

I doubt Ware ever becomes a leader for the mere fact that he does not talk much trash on the field...Ferguson should be a leader, I don't know if he is or not.

The best hope for him is to become like Ellis. Except that he will be able to carry the higher level of play to elevate his standing. But yes, I doubt it as well.

Perhaps Hamlin will come in and start a fire or two?

This is the one offseason acquisition that I think absolutely has to be a hit.

Go back to his introductory press conference. Jones said a lot there. He has to assume a leadership role and sadly, tell our secondary where to be (why can't Williams?). He is fiery and is the anti-Williams. He makes the hits, but also is catalytic emotionally. I am pinning my hopes on him for the defense. If he fails, it is the usual gang of idiots.

Romo has his part covered and he could become even more of a leader if the teams starts winning games...

My only reservation is that he is more along the lines of Meredith leader. A jokester, playboy and gunslinger.

Maybe the Cowboys should have kept Bryant? He was the only one to challenge Parcells!!

:laugh2:

Being an ignorant malcontent with an overinflated impression of yourself is not the same thing as leadership.

 

[ZeroClub]

It is all about personalities and peer pressure.

Let's assume several things here. And maybe (I stress maybe) there were several trains of thought in our lockerroom.

We had people who bought into the system because it worked before: Ferguson, T. Glenn, A. Glenn.

New "Parcells Guys" who "got it": Newman, Witten, Romo, Bradie James.

And some holdovers and malingerers who didn't: Ellis, Owens, Williams.

The one responsible for the fire-breathing was the head coach. No one was compelled to stand up consistently.

Some, like Newman, tried to step up and lieutenant. But lets understand that is not his personality. There was not a player on this team who had not only buy-in, but the psychological makeup to actually relish that role.

We are still in search of that personality. They are rare, but necessary IMO.

Look back at the great Cowboy teams and their makeup and think of it like a king's court.

Aikman: The aloof king.

Irvin, Haley: The enforcers.

Smith: The leader of the foot soldiers.

Who fills those roles now?

I am hard pressed to think of one.

Yeah, I'm on board with this.

Another factor to throw into the mix -

A few years ago, the Cowboys roster was said to be reminiscent of a donut. There were young players and there were old players, but not as many mid-career players as the typical NFL roster. The general lack of mid-career players was attributed to several years of poor drafting before Parcells' arrival. ... anyhow, this idiosyncrasy of the Cowboys' rosters may have played a role.

 

[Alexander]

Yeah, I'm on board with this.

Another factor to throw into the mix -

A few years ago, the Cowboys roster was said to be reminiscent of a donut. There were young players and there were old players, but not as many mid-career players as the typical NFL roster. The general lack of mid-career players was attributed to several years of poor drafting before Parcells' arrival. ... anyhow, this idiosyncrasy of the Cowboys' rosters may have played a role.

Perhaps.

But our teams under Coach Johnson was amazingly young and they experienced success early and built upon it.

This is an important year for a fairly young roster that Coach Parcells has built. He gutted what was becoming an older team and our core is still young. The veterans are short timers and there appears to be a succession plan in some cases, but not all.

I just hope Coach Phillips is the right person to steward it. We still will need players to execute the entire operation, perhaps now more than ever.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

to me, leadership is setting an example, and on the football field, that's getting everyone in position to do well

after that, the players need to take that example and get in the right position and play well, leadership is getting overrated on this board, leadership is not calling people out in the media and following their every footstep to make sure they're doing what they're suppose to, you can't hold their hands all day

also, leadership isn't just gyrating, flailing your arms and foaming at the mouth