Hello dear readers,
It's been a while since I last updated, and while I'd love to say that I've been busy, I've mostly been at a loss of things to write about.
Until today. The Tampa Bay Bucs signed - according to sources - Antonio Brown to a one year contract full of incentives. And this poses an interesting question.
When does and should talent trump culture?
Now, we don't need to dive into Antonio Brown's history. There is no questioning his talent on the field. And there's no questioning his "talent" to cause himself serious heartache off the field. From sexual assault allegations, to general assault, to his diva like behavior with the Steelers, and the Raiders, and then his bridge burning with the Patriots, there's plenty to talk about.
But I'm not diving into his history. Better, more informed writers will do so. I'm going to address it as I've dealt with it from my own coaching history, and then offer my opinion.
Generally we can begin with the opinion: No talent is worth compromising your team or program culture.
I worked with a program, and before leaving, I had a face to face with the second in command on the board. I handed them a two page breakdown of what I saw in the program, and problems that were both on the rise, as well as reaching a boiling point. We don't need to get into specifics, but I told the board member that 99 percent of all issues within any given program were self inflicted. You could trace nearly every problem back to a decision or lack of decision made within the program. Most programs face problems because they are always looking externally for the source when they should be looking inside.
I do not believe that creating a good culture within a program is that difficult. I believe the difficulty comes in two forms:
1. Culture is dumped onto the existing culture of the program like a bucket of water and is expected to stick.
2. Culture is established but never fed.
You cannot walk in and drop a brand new culture on the program and athletes without leading them through the process. I've worked with a coach who struggled to understand this. The culture they wanted to create was excellent, and well thought out. However, they simply walked in and threw the culture onto the team and expected the culture to sort itself out. They were constantly amazed and frustrated that while the culture was slowly sinking in - emphasis on slowly - that it wasn't taking hold the way they wanted. The mistake made was dropping a new culture onto an existing culture and taking zero ownership of it. Yes, it does need to become the team culture, and eventually, in an ideal setting, the team will enforce the culture, but until then, you have to lead. The team has the old culture, and now there is a clash. And whenever there is a clash, the team will revert back to what it knows. It might understand that the new culture is better, but without any idea how to reach it, or what's expected, they won't embrace it. If you will not take ownership of the culture that you're attempting to create, then your culture will fail.
I've also worked with coaches who believe that culture is a permanent thing. They believed it was capable of absorbing any body blow and surviving. While this can be true of strong cultures, this culture must be fed and reinforced. The coach in question refused to enforce the culture, and the body blows that landed created massive craters in the team culture as well as the message that was being delivered. By choosing to not feed the culture, the issues began to erode the stability eventually causing it to fail. Athletes who believed in the culture that had been established were frustrated that newer athletes were not held to the same sort of standard that they'd been held to when the culture was being built. This led to a catastrophic breakdown between the team, the athletes, and the head coach. Ultimate the coach lost the team and was ousted.
So what does this have to do with Antonio Brown?
It's a question of culture and what you're willing to do or test your culture with. An immensely talented athlete whose actions fly directly in the face of the team cohesion that you're attempting to build.
How much are you willing to endure with a talented athlete? How much of their antics are you will to put up with because of what they can do on the field? And how do their actions and your passive approach impact your credibility with the rest of the team? Your best athletes are only the best because they are pushed from behind by your second string and third string athletes or in rowing terms, your JV and 3V boats. Without a push from below or behind, the top boat doesn't have much driving it forward. There isn't a threat of losing a spot or generally losing a piece.
But if you coddle or accept anti team behaviors from the top, then it does two things. It either shows the second and third tier athletes that they are held to a different standard than the top which creates distrust and a break in team cohesion. And it can show them that their own behaviors can mirror the top athletes. If the varsity boat can goof off, then the JV and 3V can as well.
My own dealings with talented but problematic athletes, thankfully, has been limited. But I have had to deal with them and in one case, I waited too long to deal with them. In this particular case I did not know the length or depth of their actions in working against me as the head coach until they'd done some serious damage. Their actions were known to the athletes who assumed that I also knew which undermined my credibility. Being that they were leading the scoreboard in terms of times for tests, it made their behaviors and what they said all the more powerful.
Ultimately, upon finding out what was going on, brought to my attention by a rather angry athlete - they were angry with me because they felt that I was ignoring the problems due to what the athlete in question brought - I met with the athlete and cut them from the team. It was a blow that crippled our top lineups and ultimately likely cost us any shot at grand finals at our championship race. It also rooted within the team and would lead to issues the following season that took a bigger blow to eliminate.
My feeling is that no amount of talent should trump the program. I have watched some incredibly talented athletes be removed from teams or benched over behaviors to the betterment of a program. And I have watched as boats that should have done something historic - win a youth national championship for example - implode because problematic, talented athletes, were allowed to remain.
I see this problem like holding a lit fuse. You could throw it away but you're going to miss out - potentially - on what blowing the fuse might reveal. On the other hand, holding onto the fuse most likely means you're going to blow up alongside everything and everyone else. There's always the hope that you can churn through the season fast enough that you get the most out of the athlete before they do any damage, but that is the thinking that ended up sowing problems down the road for me at one stop.
Every coach will have their own way of handling talented, problematic athletes. I do not believe that you should ever compromise your program for an athlete. The benefits are short term for long term, possibly permanent damage.
Comments