"Internal Debate. External Unity." = We're lying to you.

[GG]

Building consensus is not lying at all. Saying in public it was consensus when it clearly wasn't is.

Consensus does not necessarily mean unanimity.

 

I don't find Brandon's words disingenuous. He simply wanted to reinforce that with the petulant child out on the street, the organization can go back to functioning normally without public discord.

[BillsVet]

At least Russ Brandon can't lie about claiming to have input on football.

 

Well, almost as much as him not being the big wheel at OBD or the guy who gets in front of camera. His air time is pretty much over because he's never going to be as entertaining as Rex.

[Kelly the Dog]

Consensus does not necessarily mean unanimity.

 

I don't find Brandon's words disingenuous. He simply wanted to reinforce that with the petulant child out on the street, the organization can go back to functioning normally without public discord.

That's a good point and something I could agree with.

 

I wasn't implying consensus always meant unanimity. That is surely true.

[Dibs]

Good point, and I agree. But actually I didn't make that assumption, nor did I first use that word. DC Tom introduced it to distinguish between debate and dissent. I wasn't really even talking about dissent at first. I was more talking about general legitimate disagreement about an unknown, even if there was no fighting or storming out of rooms at all.

 

You can be a team player if you agree to go with the consensus if you are the HC and your team wants to draft Mariotta and you vehemently believe that the pick should be Winston. And it would be external unity.

 

But it would also be a lie, and you would likely spend years getting accused of being an idiot for wanting to draft Mariotta who turns out to be a bum while Winston becomes a star. My point is you should say those words or bring it up at all, especially if it is not true. Like they did last year right after the draft.

But the unity is that they all agree to a concensus. There is no actual lie unless they state something akin to "We all believe that player X is the best choice". That theoretically won't be the statement.....instead it being one like "It was a concensus decision, we are all on board with this pick".

 

More pertinent perhaps is.....what should they be saying? If not up front about the process, at some point the media will ask about individual thoughts on certain issues.....which would have to prompt the same response(unless you think it wise they air their dirty laudry to the public).

[Coach Tuesday]

I have this fantasy where we'd get to see a Seinfeld skit of the "go ahead and fire me" incident, with those guys from Texas who kept calling George a bastard and then laughing ridiculously and slapping him on the back.

 

Will it ever happen?

[Rivermont Mike]

This discussion is giving me a headache. But you guys have at it.

Jeez, yeah. I came here for Bills discussion, not Organizational Behavior 201

[eball]

I don't know, I like it. If they say nothing, they're just inviting the media to come snooping around looking for juicy quotes that contradict the "company line." The media may still snoop, but they can shut it down pretty quickly.

 

By the way, I bet Overdorf is the rat.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I can't see this triumvirate working. Even Whaley himself said he's not sure what happens when there's a disagreement.

 

He said that? The answer is obvious. Pegula makes the decision.

[ddaryl]

man some of you turn over rocks just to come up with a new complaint.

 

Who the hell cares, none of those words bothers me one iota

[hondo in seattle]

 

Kelly the Dog, with all respect, I think this represents a very incomplete view of business or project team dynamics.

 

It's not a lie if a team decision is not a always unanimous or consensus decision. In fact, it's more common than not, and it's considered healthy so long as everyone on the team has a chance to state their arguments and make their case and everyone listens and considers. Then either the majority rules or the team leader has to step out and say "ok, I've heard everyone and this the way we're going to go." It's still a team decision because it was made after hearing and weighing everyone's input, and on healthy teams everyone then buys in to the final decision and goes forward with it and avoids second-guessing or "I told you so'ing" down the road. If they really felt that strongly before the fact, then they needed to cowboy up argue their case more cogently at the time.

 

Yep.

 

When I was an army officer, I was told to simply implement the decisions made by the chain of command, never add my own personal take. If my commander and I argued and I lost, I simply got done whatever he wanted me to do.

 

Likewise, I run my current business the same way. We disagree sometimes when the leadership team meets. But once the final decision has been made, we all go out and execute as if it was our idea.

 

When you share the disagreements with subordinates, they start to questions and doubt the decision and execution becomes poor. Even bad decisions can work when executed with passion. So our business leaders always present a united, enthusiastic front. We don't lie to anyone - we simply don't advertise the details of the disagreement and hit the plan hard.

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

name 1 team that doesn't lie to its fans?

I like pie.

 

I cannot lie.

shouldn't that be I like cherry pie.

[TheLynchTrain]

I like Doug Whaley. I think he does have an eye for talent, particularly when you compare him to some of the bozos we've had making decisions in the past. Regarding his trade valuations, I think at this point in his career, he's probably given too much value away for what he's receiving, but I'm confident over time he'll get a better feel for it.

 

However, when it comes to public speaking, Whaley has come off like a buffoon - whether it was not taking ownership of the EJ pick, some earlier gaffes as Assistant GM about not understanding the cap/football administration, and now this inconvenient phrase, among others - he's said some things that have made the average fan cringe. But does it really matter what he says to the public and the fans? Probably not. As long as he keeps stacking talent on the roster and resigning our own guys, he can bumble through press conferences all he wants.

 

Now on this silliness about potential Rex/Doug friction brewing in the future (from PFT and others) - I think that's complete crap. Anyone that's followed Rex in the past will tell you Rex does not want the power that comoes with personnel or front office control. He's a coach that wants to coach, that's it. I'd imagine he'd want authority over his assistants (especially with some of the OCs forced on him in NY), but every coach wants that. A coach that just wants to coach, I know that's rare these days with the Kellys, Harbaughs, Carrolls, etc. How refreshing is that?

Edited January 16, 2015 by TheLynchTrain

[BillnutinHouston]

I can't see this triumvirate working. Even Whaley himself said he's not sure what happens when there's a disagreement.

Q, you raise a good point. It's apparent that there's uncertainty today about where all the power and final decision making authority lies. I imagine that Terry's view is, "you guys (Whaley and Ryan) figure stuff out, debate it, and if you need a tiebreaker, come see me."

 

I think that approach can work in the honeymoon stage and before anything fails, but as time goes on Terry will have to formalize the process and roles further.

Edited January 16, 2015 by BillnutinHouston

[John from Riverside]

I dont consider it lying

 

- If you have strong minds you are going to have differing opinions.....in the military we called it "think tank" where ALL opinions/actions were considered and debated........and in the end the leader of our group made the final decision.....and regardless of our opinion we were all unanimously behind him to any outside entitiy.....right or wrong.

 

The problem here is that Marrone is one of those black sheep that wanted to go behind everyone's back and say that he was the voice of reason and every one else was wrong.

 

Bad form....and frankly I think he is paying for it right now.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

...I think it's an interesting debate. If you're complaining about the complaining, I haven't been this happy or optimistic as a Bills fan in a long, long time.

 

Not all pie.

I was hoping for more. What's so interesting about the revelation that public facing organizations align external communications?

 

It's not a real debate, it's merely pitting an ignorant viewpoint versus reality. And typically it doesn't get this desperate for topics until March

[Dibs]

I can't see this triumvirate working. Even Whaley himself said he's not sure what happens when there's a disagreement.

 

They each have their areas of control and would obviously have final say in their own areas. Whaley has final say on which FAs to get and who to draft, Rex has final say on game strategy and who suits up and Brandon has final say in all other areas.

 

How do you imaging other teams functioning.....and why do you imagine it working for most other teams but not the Bills?

[QCity]

 

He said that? The answer is obvious. Pegula makes the decision.

 

Well, the problems start to arise when two parties start vying for Pegula's ear. This probably won't happen in the early honeymoon phase, but with careers on the line and type-A personalities, it's safe to say it will at some point (you want to succeed or fail on your own terms - not someone else's mistake). Also -- and this may sound like school playground politics -- if one party is perceived as "schmoozing the boss," it gives the impression of a power grab and could foster resentment between the two.

 

They each have their areas of control and would obviously have final say in their own areas. Whaley has final say on which FAs to get and who to draft, Rex has final say on game strategy and who suits up and Brandon has final say in all other areas.

 

How do you imaging other teams functioning.....and why do you imagine it working for most other teams but not the Bills?

 

 

 

The Bills' new approach keeps Whaley in charge of the 53-man roster while Ryan -- who coaches the players that Whaley selects -- doesn't answer to Whaley, but Pegula.

 

What happens, then, when Whaley and Ryan disagree on a football matter? After Wednesday's news conference, Whaley admitted that he isn't quite sure.

 

"That's an interesting question," Whaley told the Toronto Sun's John Kryk. "I think the way we look at it is there's going to be disagreements, and you want that. You want internal debate, external unity.

 

"Does it go to Terry? Does it go to Kim? Does it go to Russ? Wherever it goes, as long as it's the best decision for the Buffalo Bills."

 

File that one away.

 

 

That was my take on it too Dibs, until I read the above quote. Maybe Whaley just doesn't understand everyone's exact roles? Why would he think it would ever go to Russ??

 

​Most teams outline a specific hierarchy such as Owner -> GM -> Coach to define a clear chain of command. I don't think our triumvirate will work for the reasons I mentioned above. Then again, if we go 12-4. none of this will matter. However if we slip back to 6-10, it's a recipe for a front office meltdown.

[Sisyphean Bills]

They each have their areas of control and would obviously have final say in their own areas. Whaley has final say on which FAs to get and who to draft, Rex has final say on game strategy and who suits up and Brandon has final say in all other areas.

 

How do you imaging other teams functioning.....and why do you imagine it working for most other teams but not the Bills?

 

I hope it doesn't work in a way where people are off building their fiefdoms.

 

When Whaley built a roster and Marrone, for whatever reason, was unable (or unwilling) to use the parts he packaged up for him on offense, we got an anemic product. That's no way to Build a Bully.

 

If you use Parcells' analogy, it is important that Whaley shops for the right ingredients for his chef. If Rex sets the menu to serve steaks, then Whaley can't go off, see a sale price on chicken, call the CPA to see how much money the restaurant will save with chicken, and show up with a flock of frozen chicken. Everyone has to face the same goal post. If Rex wants steak, I expect Whaley to put each steak off the butcher's table through his fancy little microscope and know exactly which one will work for Rex and make the customers smile their butts off.

[Haven Moses]

I have a hard time seeing Rex get overruled.

 

If it ever were to happen, I have a harder time seeing Rex get overruled and keeping his mouth shut about it.

[eball]

 

I hope it doesn't work in a way where people are off building their fiefdoms.

 

When Whaley built a roster and Marrone, for whatever reason, was unable (or unwilling) to use the parts he packaged up for him on offense, we got an anemic product. That's no way to Build a Bully.

 

If you use Parcells' analogy, it is important that Whaley shops for the right ingredients for his chef. If Rex sets the menu to serve steaks, then Whaley can't go off, see a sale price on chicken, call the CPA to see how much money the restaurant will save with chicken, and show up with a flock of frozen chicken. Everyone has to face the same goal post. If Rex wants steak, I expect Whaley to put each steak off the butcher's table through his fancy little microscope and know exactly which one will work for Rex and make the customers smile their butts off.

 

Is anyone else hungry?