What Did McDermott Mean By Saying “We Let Too Many Leaders Out of The Building” in Carolina

[Phil The Thrill]

One line from McDermott’s press conference seemed to stick with me.  When asked about the past with Carolina, he said this:
 

“On of the things that happened when we came off the Super Bowl in Carolina was, lessons that we learned… we let too many of the leaders out of the building. Some of that happens with retirement and other reasons that come with age. But overall, that’s part of what I meant with keeping as much of this team in-tact as possible. Each year and each team is different, but you give yourself a better chance with the more that you keep a team in-tact.”

How do you interpret that quote?

 

To me, it says that he wants as many process guys on the team as possible.  And while fans may complain about the Frank Gores, Lee Smiths, and Patrick DiMarcos - I don’t think any of these players (sans Gore) are going anywhere.

 

The danger there of course, is that at times late in the season and playoffs Frank Gore was hurting this football team.  While he made many big contributions off the field (most with Singletary), there were times that many of us groaned  each time he slammed into the pile for a 1 yard gain on 1st and 10.  Gore reminds me of another process guy Mike “Pooh Bear” Tolbert.    
 

I think the larger point is that he wants to keep this team together, but to what extent? Clearly he can’t keep everyone and there are some positions that need upgrades.  What do you make of his speech?

 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Gore isn't coming back. The other 2 likely will be back.  

 

 

[Rad Likes The Bills]

Gore is done. But to your point I believe he means he thought they had the young guys to step up and replace what they lost (I believe Norman,Tillman, Finnegan their whole CB’s!!!) but they weren’t up to the task.  That’s why they took the step back they did the following year 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said:

One line from McDermott’s press conference seemed to stick with me.  When asked about the past with Carolina, he said this:
 

“On of the things that happened when we came off the Super Bowl in Carolina was, lessons that we learned… we let too many of the leaders out of the building. Some of that happens with retirement and other reasons that come with age. But overall, that’s part of what I meant with keeping as much of this team in-tact as possible. Each year and each team is different, but you give yourself a better chance with the more that you keep a team in-tact.”

How do you interpret that quote?

 

To me, it says that he wants as many process guys on the team as possible.  And while fans may complain about the Frank Gores, Lee Smiths, and Patrick DiMarcos - I don’t think any of these players (sans Gore) are going anywhere.

 

The danger there of course, is that at times late in the season and playoffs Frank Gore was hurting this football team.  While he made many big contributions off the field (most with Singletary), there were times that many of us groaned  each time he slammed into the pile for a 1 yard gain on 1st and 10.  Gore reminds me of another process guy Mike “Pooh Bear” Tolbert.    
 

I think the larger point is that he wants to keep this team together, but to what extent? Clearly he can’t keep everyone and there are some positions that need upgrades.  What do you make of his speech?

 

 

I think it means that the folks posting stuff about all the cuts and surprise cuts we're going to see to save cap room and hire 3 big splashy FA are gonna be hella sad in March.

 

I think it means just what he said - they try to have vet players in every room who interpret the coach's message for the team but who may not be the best players on the team or the best players available.   McDermott wants Beane to make a push to sign FA's like Shaq Lawson and Jordan Phillips (and/or Corey Liuget, if he thinks he's contributed and shown leadership).  I think it means he expects to keep guys who are under contract like DiMarco and Roberts (for ST) and Smith around.  The only way he cuts those guys is if they bring in a veteran who seems to bring what he regards as equivalent leadership.

 

There are some guys like 'Zo who have retired and others like Gore who really should retire.    That's what he means by "some of that happens with retirement and other reasons that come with age"

 

Don't expect him to be going along with cutting or trading any proven veterans like Poyer because we have promising youngsters, before he sees that those youngsters have indeed stepped up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

2 minutes ago, Rad Likes The Bills said:

Gore is done. But to your point I believe he means he thought they had the young guys to step up and replace what they lost (I believe Norman,Tillman, Finnegan their whole CB’s!!!) but they weren’t up to the task.  That’s why they took the step back they did the following year 

Yeah. I'm sure they're going to lock up Hyde and Poyer and make them retire Bills. I wonder if we see matching extensions this offseason.

[Mr. WEO]

What process are Smith and DiMarco contributing to on Offense?  Having "good guys" and "leaders" is fine, but they don't produce any value in games.  

 

This offense has scored 301, 269 and 314 points over the past 3 seasons.  

[Doc Brown]

Not resigning Josh Norman comes to mind as Carolina's defense regressed from 6th to 26th under McDermott when he left.  That wasn't the sole reason but it's what he could be referencing.  Maybe they try and lock up Tre White this offseason.

[JoPoy88]

I think the Bills already have young leaders in Allen and Tre and Edmunds so the issue is moot. I really don’t think this team needs to carry guys just for veteran leadership anymore. They did this season and maybe those guys like Gore and Lorax did steward the young talent to what they accomplished. Now they know. And now it’s time. Losing those vets shouldn’t hurt the team at all.

[Matt_In_NH]

Lee smith is a leader. ..... in penalties per play

[Aireskoi]

5 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Not resigning Josh Norman comes to mind as Carolina's defense regressed from 6th to 26th under McDermott when he left.  That wasn't the sole reason but it's what he could be referencing.  Maybe they try and lock up Tre White this offseason.

 

That was my thought at the time.  I don't think big money deals like Smith and DiMarco would have been on the top of his list.

[eball]

I think in order to interpret McD's remark about Carolina one would need to look specifically at the roster changes from the Super Bowl year to the next and then see what conclusions might be drawn.  I'm not willing to do that but it seems like the logical place to start.

 

 

Edited January 18, 2020 by eball

[stuvian]

maybe he has a succession plan to hire retiring players as coaches

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

It probably means, pay our own guys and keep the core together as long as possible. White, Edmunds, Milano, Allen, Dawkins, Phillips etc. When their time comes, keep them instead of paying other teams FA and keep drafting well. 

[Sherlock Holmes]

It means we bring on Kuechly...

[Cripple Creek]

7 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

What process are Smith and DiMarco contributing to on Offense?  Having "good guys" and "leaders" is fine, but they don't produce any value in games.  

 

This offense has scored 301, 269 and 314 points over the past 3 seasons.  

Lee Smith goes to dinner with guys and stuff.

[MJS]

I don't think he was speaking in code. He probably meant what he said.

[papazoid]

leaders  = process guys

 

that means they are worth paying  a little extra.. .

 

having said that...this is a cold ruthless business

 

gore, lee smith and dimarco are all gone !!... deservedly so

[Don Otreply]

8 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think it means that the folks posting stuff about all the cuts and surprise cuts we're going to see to save cap room and hire 3 big splashy FA are gonna be hella sad in March.

 

I think it means just what he said - they try to have vet players in every room who interpret the coach's message for the team but who may not be the best players on the team or the best players available.   McDermott wants Beane to make a push to sign FA's like Shaq Lawson and Jordan Phillips (and/or Corey Liuget, if he thinks he's contributed and shown leadership).  I think it means he expects to keep guys who are under contract like DiMarco and Roberts (for ST) and Smith around.  The only way he cuts those guys is if they bring in a veteran who seems to bring what he regards as equivalent leadership.

 

There are some guys like 'Zo who have retired and others like Gore who really should retire.    That's what he means by "some of that happens with retirement and other reasons that come with age"

 

Don't expect him to be going along with cutting or trading any proven veterans like Poyer because we have promising youngsters, before he sees that those youngsters have indeed stepped up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This ^^^ 

 

[Niagara Dude]

8 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

One line from McDermott’s press conference seemed to stick with me.  When asked about the past with Carolina, he said this:
 

“On of the things that happened when we came off the Super Bowl in Carolina was, lessons that we learned… we let too many of the leaders out of the building. Some of that happens with retirement and other reasons that come with age. But overall, that’s part of what I meant with keeping as much of this team in-tact as possible. Each year and each team is different, but you give yourself a better chance with the more that you keep a team in-tact.”

How do you interpret that quote?

 

To me, it says that he wants as many process guys on the team as possible.  And while fans may complain about the Frank Gores, Lee Smiths, and Patrick DiMarcos - I don’t think any of these players (sans Gore) are going anywhere.

 

The danger there of course, is that at times late in the season and playoffs Frank Gore was hurting this football team.  While he made many big contributions off the field (most with Singletary), there were times that many of us groaned  each time he slammed into the pile for a 1 yard gain on 1st and 10.  Gore reminds me of another process guy Mike “Pooh Bear” Tolbert.    
 

I think the larger point is that he wants to keep this team together, but to what extent? Clearly he can’t keep everyone and there are some positions that need upgrades.  What do you make of his speech?

 

The problem with that comment is that team went to the Super Bowl and his team has not even won a playoff game so we don't have the talent at this point.  You need to gas loser players like Kroft/Muphy/Dimarco/Lee Smith.  These are Sean type of players,  good guys with zero talent and not going to help you win against good teams.

 

Sign a couple of high end free agents and win some playoff games,  right the Bills are a team that had very easy schedule and still needs show they can beat playoff good teams.  

 

8 minutes ago, papazoid said:

leaders  = process guys

 

that means they are worth paying  a little extra.. .

 

having said that...this is a cold ruthless business

 

gore, lee smith and dimarco are all gone !!... deservedly so

Yes i agree,  Sean needs to look at the teams they beat this season and the teams they lost to.  He needs better talent to beat the better teams.  

[skibum]

It will be interesting to see how this translates to free agency. McBeane may decide they would rather overpay guys like Shaq and Phillps in order to preserve continuity of leadership as well as scheme. If you think about it, that continuity does have value beyond what a new guy could bring at a lower salary.

 

You might save a few million bringing in guys with lower price tags, but then you're rolling the dice on whether or not they fit. The same could be said of marquis free agents, too - they don't always pan out. You know exactly what you're getting from the guys on your team, and that's worth a lot. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Yeah. I'm sure they're going to lock up Hyde and Poyer and make them retire Bills. I wonder if we see matching extensions this offseason.

 

OH, now that's an intriguing thought.  One question is "how do you Pay Poyer without de-motivating other players on the secondary?"

If Poyer thinks he should be paid as a top-10 and Hyde is still just outside top 20 for two more years, that's where this extending guys under contract thing gets tricky, very tricky.

 

That would be an answer.

 

8 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

What good is continuity with Lee Smith and Pat DiMarco??

 

The thread is about what McDermott meant.  I'm telling you what McDermott meant.  Go laugh at McDermott.

 

ST likes Pat DiMarco.  I haven't spent much time watching - he's R4 or L4 I think, along with 'Zo but we've already lost 'Zo.  He's also valued for his leadership.

Smith is still the best blocking TE we have and no one else to date has shown better, including Kroft.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

What process are Smith and DiMarco contributing to on Offense?  Having "good guys" and "leaders" is fine, but they don't produce any value in games. 

 

Look, Smith wouldn't be on the field for 30% of the offensive snaps if Daboll didn't believe he contributed value in games - at least, more value than anyone else on the team right now, he wouldn't be on the field.  It's that simple.  His value does not lie in his catch percentage (80%, 4 of 5) his TD (1) or his 1st downs (2).  He's also on the field for ~1 of 5 ST snaps.

 

Dimarco's snap counts have fallen on ST (>50% last year, 37% in 2019) but that's principally why he's on the team.  He played 17% of the offensive snaps.  Again,  if the coaches didn't think he brought value to the field, he wouldn't be on it.

[Mr. WEO]

 

10 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

OH, now that's an intriguing thought.  One question is "how do you Pay Poyer without de-motivating other players on the secondary?"

If Poyer thinks he should be paid as a top-10 and Hyde is still just outside top 20 for two more years, that's where this extending guys under contract thing gets tricky, very tricky.

 

That would be an answer.

 

 

The thread is about what McDermott meant.  I'm telling you what McDermott meant.  Go laugh at McDermott.

 

ST likes Pat DiMarco.  I haven't spent much time watching - he's R4 or L4 I think, along with 'Zo but we've already lost 'Zo.  He's also valued for his leadership.

Smith is still the best blocking TE we have and no one else to date has shown better, including Kroft.

 

I think it's time to move the Offense solidly into the 2020's and not be the Offense that needs to employ an old TE who just blocks.

 

How did that work out anyway?

[Gray Beard]

You need leaders to help the young guys...

in the film room. 

during practice.

not get too high or too low during games.

behave like professionals off the field.

take care of their bodies.

etc.

 

 

So you have a few guys like DiMarco or Smith who aren’t splashy during games, but they provide value to the team in other ways.  They don’t cost money, but they cost a few roster spots.  The brain trust at OBD thinks the trade off is worthwhile.  I don’t have a problem with that. 

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Look, Smith wouldn't be on the field for 30% of the offensive snaps if Daboll didn't believe he contributed value in games - at least, more value than anyone else on the team right now, he wouldn't be on the field.  It's that simple.  His value does not lie in his catch percentage (80%, 4 of 5) his TD (1) or his 1st downs (2).  He's also on the field for ~1 of 5 ST snaps.

 

Dimarco's snap counts have fallen on ST (>50% last year, 37% in 2019) but that's principally why he's on the team.  He played 17% of the offensive snaps.  Again,  if the coaches didn't think he brought value to the field, he wouldn't be on it.

 

It's obvious McD thinks that these guys bring value.  The discussion is whether that thinking is useful anymore, given the results.  This is a coaching staff that didn't think their most dynamic player not named Josh Allen only deserved 13 touches in a playoff game.

[BigBillsFan]

It means if we get more Lee Smiths I SMELL SUPERBOWL

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Gray Beard said:

You need leaders to help the young guys...

in the film room. 

during practice.

 

not get too high or too low during games.

behave like professionals off the field.

take care of their bodies.

etc.

 

 

So you have a few guys like DiMarco or Smith who aren’t splashy during games, but they provide value to the team in other ways.  They don’t cost money, but they cost a few roster spots.  The brain trust at OBD thinks the trade off is worthwhile.  I don’t have a problem with that. 

 

 

How many process (only) guys are on the 49ers?  Chiefs?  Titans?

[Dave Allen]

Veteran leaders/ process guys have a value that extends past what we see them do on the field. If they're in the locker room teaching the young'uns how to be process guys also, then they are worth the extra money. There were several other teams that had more talent (on paper) and couldn't/wouldn't step up because they had no culture, no leadership (coughcoughdallascough). That's what leadership is worth. 

[Gray Beard]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

How many process (only) guys are on the 49ers?  Chiefs?  Titans?

Some of those teams are fortunate enough to have process guys who are still producing at a high level.  Tight ends seem to be a common denominator.  I think the staff originally thought the process guys on the Bills were capable of producing, and a few of them will be jettisoned in the off season. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

31 minutes ago, BigBillsFan said:

It means if we get more Lee Smiths I SMELL SUPERBOWL

 

 

...sounds like a sinus infection bud............

[Mr. WEO]

19 minutes ago, Gray Beard said:

Some of those teams are fortunate enough to have process guys who are still producing at a high level.  Tight ends seem to be a common denominator.  I think the staff originally thought the process guys on the Bills were capable of producing, and a few of them will be jettisoned in the off season. 

 

What other coaching staff would have looked at Smith ans DiMarco and thought they were still capable of producing?

 

Swap these guys out of their spotless game day unis and put them in Underarmour polo shirts and khakis and call them Offensive Efficiency Assistant Coaches.

 

Go get some playmakers.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, JoPoy88 said:

I think the Bills already have young leaders in Allen and Tre and Edmunds so the issue is moot. I really don’t think this team needs to carry guys just for veteran leadership anymore. They did this season and maybe those guys like Gore and Lorax did steward the young talent to what they accomplished. Now they know. And now it’s time. Losing those vets shouldn’t hurt the team at all.

 

That's an interesting point.

 

But given what McDermott said about "letting to many leaders out of the building" the conclusion would seem be he doesn't quite agree with you yet.  Lorax and Gore are gone, but I think he still wants players like Lotulelei (esp. if they can't resign Phillips), Smith (esp. if they move on from Kroft), and DiMarco (esp. if Gore is gone)

Edmunds and Tre, going to their first probowl, seem like they're well on their way to having mastered their craft.  Are they ready to step up and call out a teammate who is underperforming?  To say "Matt - it doesn't matter *****-all if you fly to the QB or fly to the ball if you don't WRAP HIM UP and HANG ON, you feel me?"  Would Edmunds call out a DLman?  Don't know yet, but something I see in their demeanor looks promising.

I don't think Allen is at the point of being able to be a team leader yet.  It's not that he doesn't show leadership at times, because he does.  It's that he's still (we hope) at the developing stage of his craft.  He admits to being "jittery" before games.  He tries to do too much.  He spends too much time in his press conferences saying he's got to find more completions and get the ball to Singletary more.  It's hard to run up and down the sideline encouraging others when you know too much about all the crap you're doing wrong.  Let's hope he takes that step this off season to where he can be that guy.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

That's an interesting point.

 

But given what McDermott said about "letting to many leaders out of the building" the conclusion would seem be he doesn't quite agree with you yet.  Lorax and Gore are gone, but I think he still wants players like Lotulelei (esp. if they can't resign Phillips), Smith (esp. if they move on from Kroft), and DiMarco (esp. if Gore is gone)

Edmunds and Tre, going to their first probowl, seem like they're well on their way to having mastered their craft.  Are they ready to step up and call out a teammate who is underperforming?  To say "Matt - it doesn't matter *****-all if you fly to the QB or fly to the ball if you don't WRAP HIM UP and HANG ON, you feel me?"  Would Edmunds call out a DLman?  Don't know yet, but something I see in their demeanor looks promising.

I don't think Allen is at the point of being able to be a team leader yet.  It's not that he doesn't show leadership at times, because he does.  It's that he's still (we hope) at the developing stage of his craft.  He admits to being "jittery" before games.  He tries to do too much.  He spends too much time in his press conferences saying he's got to find more completions and get the ball to Singletary more.  It's hard to run up and down the sideline encouraging others when you know too much about all the crap you're doing wrong.  Let's hope he takes that step this off season to where he can be that guy.

 

...agree that he values veteran leadership and it makes sense.....but, isn't it a fair expectation that the vet must also be a contributor on the field when called upon (NOT spot duty)?.....even if at worst, it is a 50/50 percentage?.....go back to the days of Bobby April and special teams.........he had WAY too much say in the final 53.......when the injury bug hit, virtually NONE of his guys could fill in at their natural positions......that woeful imbalance had Jauron shopping at Walmart for bodies....

[Hapless Bills Fan]

48 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

How many process (only) guys are on the 49ers?  Chiefs?  Titans?

 

If a guy is getting on the field for 1/3 to 1/5 of the snaps over the Young Sahibs, how do you conclude he's a "process only" guy?

 

But to answer your own question: go sort the respective rosters by age.  Look for a guy towards the end of his career, 28-32, who is not a kicker punter or long snapper and who is getting 15-33% of the snaps on offense or ST.  Looks like a handful to me.

6 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...agree that he values veteran leadership and it makes sense.....but, isn't it a fair expectation that the vet must also be a contributor on the field when called upon (NOT spot duty)?.....even if at worst, it is a 50/50 percentage?.....go back to the days of Bobby April and special teams.........he had WAY too much say in the final 53.......when the injury bug hit, virtually NONE of his guys could fill in at their natural positions......that woeful imbalance had Jauron shopping at Walmart for bodies....

 

Absolutely vet must contribute, but 30-37% isn't "spot duty"

 

I think they were disappointed in the # of false start penalties Smith had and the couple of targets Dimarco didn't haul in, and it's possible they may be gone esp if they want to keep Kroft around.  But those guys are still on the field ~1/3 of the snaps because they are seen as contributing on the field better than the other choices who were there at the end of preseason or available to be brought in.  Period.

 

I do think Heath Farwell may be in the position of "to whom much is given, much is expected" - I think ST has not performed as expected for getting the extra say in bodies he's gotten, BUT I think Beane did say something about needing to bring in more and better ST contributors - so we'll see.  I'm of your opinion that we have too many guys on the offensive side of the roster who are there for ST and not pulling their weight at their natural positions.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

7 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

If a guy is getting on the field for 1/3 to 1/5 of the snaps over the Young Sahibs, how do you conclude he's a "process only" guy?

 

But to answer your own question: go sort the respective rosters by age.  Look for a guy towards the end of his career, 28-32, who is not a kicker punter or long snapper and who is getting 15-33% of the snaps on offense or ST.  Looks like a handful to me.

 

Absolutely vet must contribute, but 30-37% isn't "spot duty"

 

I think they were disappointed in the # of false start penalties Smith had and the couple of targets Dimarco didn't haul in, and it's possible they may be gone esp if they want to keep Kroft around.  But those guys are still on the field ~1/3 of the snaps because they are seen as contributing on the field better than the other choices who were there at the end of preseason or available to be brought in.  Period.

 

I do think Heath Farwell may be in the position of "to whom much is given, much is expected" - I think ST has not performed as expected for getting the extra say in bodies he's gotten, BUT I think Beane did say something about needing to bring in more and better ST contributors - so we'll see.  I'm of your opinion that we have too many guys on the offensive side of the roster who are there for ST and not pulling their weight at their natural positions.

 

 

....think that perhaps TBD negative opinions about them may be influenced or amplified by the number of mistakes happening relative to your percentage of contribution...dumb penalties (especially FS) are inexcusable.....drops are a lesser gaffe...they happen IMO....can't buy that they're getting "rusty" because of 70-63% (flip side of your number) on the bench....

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

It's obvious McD thinks that these guys bring value.  The discussion is whether that thinking is useful anymore, given the results.  This is a coaching staff that didn't think their most dynamic player not named Josh Allen only deserved 13 touches in a playoff game.

Yeah, none of this gives one confidence that the head coach really understood the lesson of last season which ought to be the offense needs more playmakers and still needs better talent on the o-line. You can fill some of those gaps with rookies, but you ought to be spending free agent dollars to boost the offense while the fella you think is going to be a franchise qb is playing on a rookie contract. (And, btw, the best way to ensure he becomes that franchise qb is to put some veteran o-lineman with superior talent at RT and G, and add maybe a TE like Hooper who won't drop a ton of passes, and maybe another veteran wr to pair with a top wideout and another young rb in the draft.) I don't worry about upgrading at edge and cb on the defensive side because I think McDermott is going to see what needs fixing on that side of the ball.

[Chaos]

I think McDermott teams and the Bills games reflect a style of solid, safe and comfortable.  He wants to have a certain number of players that help him be in his comfort zone.  He has had decent success taking the Bills from being a doormat to being a playoff caliber team.   Its not clear if this style of play will take the team to being championship caliber. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Chaos said:

I think McDermott teams and the Bills games reflect a style of solid, safe and comfortable.  He wants to have a certain number of players that help him be in his comfort zone.  He has had decent success taking the Bills from being a doormat to being a playoff caliber team.   Its not clear if this style of play will take the team to being championship caliber. 

 

 

and to his credit, he has forged an all inclusive "we're in" environment....Bickering Bills idea is LONG gone......yet plenty of clubs are faced with that  nonsense currently.....in a "high paying big boyz league", stroking/massaging egos is pure BS.....employment is a privilege afforded to 1,696 annually and not a right......

[Chaos]

6 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

More like took the team from mediocre to slightly above mediocre. 

12  /32 teams make the playoffs.  Simply making the playoffs is only a bit above average. 

[Bob in STL]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

How many process (only) guys are on the 49ers?  Chiefs?  Titans?

Probably more than a few.  Leadership should never be underestimated.   It would be great if the leadership came from the core starting players but the Bills team development is just 3 years and not there yet.  Think back to Kelly, Hull, Talley, Smith - it took years for them to fully take the reins as leaders.    
 

Allen, Edmunds and other in the young core are still very young to take that role on.   They learn it from guys like Lorenzo, DiMarco, Gore, etc.