Martindale and the Giants parted ways in January after a falling out with head coach Brian Daboll. Less than a month later, he landed the defensive coordinator position with the University of Michigan where he reportedly signed a three-year deal with a base salary of $2.3 million in 2024.
That number will increase to $2.5 million in 2025 and $2.7 million in 2026.
https://x.com/thegiantswire/status/1771106032145588637?s=46&t=1vcQIN8GqF5J2oLdxEVEJQ
Got to love football. What other industry can you produce bottom 30/10% results for three consecutive seasons, act like a child, and still earn a top-tier salary!? Good for him...
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 08:11:17 AMGot to love football. What other industry can you produce bottom 30/10% results for three consecutive seasons, act like a child, and still earn a top-tier salary!? Good for him...
It would appear Michigan didn't share you view on Wink. Full disclosure, I don't share your views on Wink.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 08:13:06 AMIt would appear Michigan didn't share you view on Wink. Full disclosure, I don't share your views on Wink.
Shocker... :P
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 08:11:17 AMGot to love football. What other industry can you produce bottom 30/10% results for three consecutive seasons, act like a child, and still earn a top-tier salary!? Good for him...
One man's trash is another man's treasure.
Presumably, he got no offers from NFL teams. Additionally, it was well-known that he wanted to be a head coach in the NFL and he got no interviews for the multiple positions that opened up. Sounds to me like he settled.
Here's a lesson for all the boys and girls: don't show up your employer and expect to get a better job elsewhere.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 08:47:21 AMOne man's trash is another man's treasure.
Presumably, he got no offers from NFL teams. Additionally, it was well-known that he wanted to be a head coach in the NFL and he got no interviews for the multiple positions that opened up. Sounds to me like he settled.
Here's a lesson for all the boys and girls: don't show up your employer and expect to get a better job elsewhere.
It's a good lesson for young people to learn, Tim.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 08:47:21 AMOne man's trash is another man's treasure.
Presumably, he got no offers from NFL teams. Additionally, it was well-known that he wanted to be a head coach in the NFL and he got no interviews for the multiple positions that opened up. Sounds to me like he settled.
Here's a lesson for all the boys and girls: don't show up your employer and expect to get a better job elsewhere.
Wink did take a $700K pay cut going from the Giants to Michigan. No doubt, the public friction between Wink and Daboll hurt Wink's marketability. I wouldn't read too much into Wink not getting HC interviews, as the league openly practices age discrimination at the HC position, and DCs are handicapped in terms of getting top jobs in a pass-driven league.
In some ways, I can sympathize with Wink. In my younger days, I was working on the squad for a crew chief who lacked the emotional composure to effectively manage the high-pressure situations faced by the emergency medical services. When bad situations came up, and she would melt down, being under her in the chain of command was less than ideal. It didn't matter if you maintained your composure, but by virtue of her authority, challenging calls were going to go less than ideal.
I am not saying Wink handled his challenging situation perfectly, but I will say he was in a situation that didn't appear to have any sort of easy solution or exit since the Giants controlled his fate and seemed unwilling to just release him from his contract.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 08:58:39 AMWink did take a $700K pay cut going from the Giants to Michigan. No doubt, the public friction between Wink and Daboll hurt Wink's marketability. I wouldn't read too much into Wink not getting HC interviews, as the league openly practices age discrimination at the HC position, and DCs are handicapped in terms of getting top jobs in a pass-driven league.
In some ways, I can sympathize with Wink. In my younger days, I was working on the squad for a crew chief who lacked the emotional composure to effectively manage the high-pressure situations faced by the emergency medical services. When bad situations came up, and she would melt down, being under her in the chain of command was less than ideal. It didn't matter if you maintained your composure, but by virtue of her authority, challenging calls were going to go less than ideal.
I am not saying Wink handled his challenging situation perfectly, but I will say he was in a situation that didn't appear to have any sort of easy solution or exit since the Giants controlled his fate and seemed unwilling to just release him from his contract.
You're definitely more sympathetic to him than I am, Rich.
I'm definitely not trying to read much into it as I don't care for him all that much. He's lacking in the emotional intelligence department, especially for someone of his age and who has (had) dreams of being an NFL head coach. Life is 10% of what happens to you and 90% how you deal with it. He didn't deal with it very well. Other teams took note.
As far as I'm concerned, it's addition by subtraction.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 09:03:21 AMYou're definitely more sympathetic to him than I am, Rich.
I'm definitely not trying to read much into it as I don't care for him all that much. He's lacking in the emotional intelligence department, especially for someone of his age and who has (had) dreams of being an NFL head coach. Life is 10% of what happens to you and 90% how you deal with it. He didn't deal with it very well. Other teams took note.
As far as I'm concerned, it's addition by subtraction.
Tim,
From everything I have heard, the guy lacking in the emotional intelligence department was Daboll. Wink always kept his composure.
It also appears that Daboll didn't like that Wink sort of operated his defense independently, which I would also fault Daboll for. A wise manager sees the big picture and doesn't sweat the minor details.
Firing Wink's men for the crime of being Wink's men also struck me as very petty and, again, lacking in emotional intelligence.
Wink has a long career as a DC and has never had this sort of public circus. Daboll's career as an HC is two years old, and he already had one circus and coaches leaving him.
I am far more concerned with Daboll and his emotional intelligence and game-day composure (I have heard far too many NFL men I respect say this is a problem) than I am about Wink or how Wink handled the departure.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 09:08:59 AMTim,
From everything I have heard, the guy lacking in the emotional intelligence department was Daboll. Wink always kept his composure.
It also appears that Daboll didn't like that Wink sort of operated his defense independently, which I would also fault Daboll for. A wise manager sees the big picture and doesn't sweat the minor details.
Firing Wink's men for the crime of being Wink's men also struck me as very petty and, again, lacking in emotional intelligence.
Wink has a long career as a DC and has never had this sort of public circus. Daboll's career as an HC is two years old, and he already had one circus and coaches leaving him.
I am far more concerned with Daboll and his emotional intelligence and game-day composure (I have heard far too many NFL men I respect say this is a problem) than I am about Wink or how Wink handled the departure.
Place as much blame on Daboll as you feel is necessary. They both need a boost in the EI department. The one thing you cannot place on Daboll is Wink's handling of the situation. That is 100% on Wink.
Daboll still has a job in the NFL. Wink does not and it has absolutely zero to do with how Daboll treated him. Your focus is Daboll. Mine is Wink's. After all, the thread is about him. ;)
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 09:08:59 AMTim,
From everything I have heard, the guy lacking in the emotional intelligence department was Daboll. Wink always kept his composure.
I suspect the lack of emotional intelligence was a significant barrier to securing a head coaching role. There are few top-tier coordinators who tried and failed to secure a head coaching job; IMO, the reason is quite obvious.
Ahh YES, another reason for me to dislike Wink!
GO BUCKEYES!! LOL
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 09:13:39 AMPlace as much blame on Daboll as you feel is necessary. They both need a boost in the EI department. The one thing you cannot place on Daboll is Wink's handling of the situation. That is 100% on Wink.
Daboll still has a job in the NFL. Wink does not and it has absolutely zero to do with how Daboll treated him. Your focus is Daboll. Mine is Wink's. After all, the thread is about him. ;)
Tim,
I was mentored by a very great man (in my opinion). One thing that he drilled in my head is that the person in charge has to be a grown-up. As a manager, you could never point to the behavior of a subordinate to explain the poor behavior of the person in charge. He also taught me it was about getting things done, not stroking the ego of the person in charge. The Giants leaked that Wink and his defensive staff ate lunches as a group separate from the rest of the coaches. This was leaked to try and make Wink look bad, but in my eyes, it made Daboll look petty and ego-driven, as it's about getting things done, not who eats lunch with whom.
Still, if you want to point the blame at Wink, have at it. Seeing how Daboll is an offensive coach with a hand in the offense (even took away play calling from his OC on multiple occasions) and the defense played better (admittedly not by much) than the offense, I think the results favor Wink more than Daboll.
Plus, I have a question for you and
@kingm56 - Do you both realize that Daboll made the decision to hire Wink? It's not like Wink was forced on Daboll. Daboll decided on the hire and subsequent pairing.
Wink leaked info to the press midseason when he was upset via his "guys" (who had no real football background other than being his sycophants). That was it for him and rightfully should have been. Wink has now managed to politic his way out of two NFL jobs. Best of luck to him at Michigan.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 10:07:24 AMPlus, I have a question for you and @kingm56 - Do you both realize that Daboll made the decision to hire Wink? It's not like Wink was forced on Daboll. Daboll decided on the hire and subsequent pairing.
Your question and subsequent point have absolutely nothing do with Wink bearing 100% responsibility for his behavior.
You are blaming Daboll for Wink's reaction. Wink is not a victim. He's a full grown-ass man who acted like a toddler because he didn't like what his boss did and responded with a big "F*CK YOU!" and stormed out of the building. He ignored calls and texts from Schoen.
Daboll lit the fire and Wink poured gasoline on it. He's a college coordinator now because of his own actions.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 10:39:05 AMYour question and subsequent point have absolutely nothing do with Wink bearing 100% responsibility for his behavior.
You are blaming Daboll for Wink's reaction. Wink is not a victim. He's a full grown-ass man who acted like a toddler because he didn't like what his boss did and responded with a big "F*CK YOU!" and stormed out of the building. He ignored calls and texts from Schoen.
Daboll lit the fire and Wink poured gasoline on it. He's a college coordinator now because of his own actions.
Wink is the HIGHEST PAID college coordinator because clearly Michigan strongly disagrees with you and
@kingm56
Wink is the highest paid DC for a couplenof reasons.
1) Michigan has had great success running a Raven style of D with a formwr Raven coach as DC. First it was Mike MacDonald then Jesse Minter. Once Minter followed Harbaugh to Los Angeles, they thought hiring Wink (Father of the Ravens D) would be right move.
2) Michigan's new HC is former OC Sherrone Moore. He is got a big bump in pay but not to Harbaugh level making extra money availble to pay coaches and coordinators.
3) Since this is first time HC Michigan wanted a veteran DC next to him.
Michigan fans are excited about this hire. I am not. While the philosophy of the D may be similar, MacDonald and Minter ran very different secondary coverages than Wink.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 10:42:13 AMWink is the HIGHEST PAID college coordinator because clearly Michigan strongly disagrees with you and @kingm56
He was a highly-regarded NFL coordinator. Michigan is ecstatic to have a coach with NFL experience go back down to the college ranks. For Wink, it was a step down.
Wink's tantrum cost him not only $700K but also a job in the NFL. He took a huge step back from his goal of being a head coach.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 10:55:39 AMHe was a highly-regarded NFL coordinator. Michigan is ecstatic to have a coach with NFL experience go back down to the college ranks. For Wink, it was a step down.
Using your logic, the NFL disagrees with you as they found Wink's temperament to be ill-suited for a HC role.
From Michigan's perspective, it makes perfect sense; they can use Wink's presence as a pretty significant recruiting carrot.
Also, Tim is 100% correct; this move cost Wink money...I'm mystified at you're attempt to spin it as anything other than what it is...the NFL rejected him.
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 11:34:45 AMUsing your logic, the NFL disagrees with you as they found Wink's temperament to be ill-suited for a HC role.
From Michigan's perspective, it makes perfect sense; they can use Wink's presence as a pretty significant recruiting carrot.
Also, Tim is 100% correct; this move cost Wink money...I'm mystified at you're attempt to spin it as anything other than what it is...the NFL rejected him.
For the NFL to "disagree with me," 31 teams would have needed to hire a DC or a HC.
Making Wink (who never coached in the college ranks) the highest-paid college DC speaks volumes for the high regard the championship Michigan program holds Wink in.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 11:36:47 AMFor the NFL to "disagree with me," 31 teams would have needed to hire a DC or a HC.
Making Wink (who never coached in the college ranks) the highest-paid college DC speaks volumes for the high regard the championship Michigan program holds Wink in.
So, Wink just started looking for HC opportunities this year? Odd...
You realize he's interviewed for multiple HC jobs over a career spanning 3 decades and was never hired. Why wasn't he hired? The answer is quite obvious...
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 11:36:47 AMMaking Wink (who never coached in the college ranks) the highest-paid college DC speaks volumes for the high regard the championship Michigan program holds Wink in.
No one disputed or disagreed with it.
I will say it again: Wink settled for less than what he wanted. He took a pay cut in salary, status, and prestige. His image took a huge hit.
I think things would have turned out differently for him if he had reacted in a much more mature and grounded way than what he did.
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 11:38:23 AMSo, Wink just started looking for HC opportunities this year? Odd...
How many defensive coaches get their first head coaching job after the age of 55?
Let us be fair and honest: It's youth and the offensive side of the ball that most teams are looking for.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 11:41:22 AMHow many defensive coaches get their first head coaching job after the age of 55?
Let us be fair and honest: It's youth and the offensive side of the ball that most teams are looking for.
Why do you believe he never earned a HC shot? He's had multiple interviews...
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 08:06:57 AMMartindale and the Giants parted ways in January after a falling out with head coach Brian Daboll. Less than a month later, he landed the defensive coordinator position with the University of Michigan where he reportedly signed a three-year deal with a base salary of $2.3 million in 2024.
That number will increase to $2.5 million in 2025 and $2.7 million in 2026.
https://x.com/thegiantswire/status/1771106032145588637?s=46&t=1vcQIN8GqF5J2oLdxEVEJQ
Did Wink hire his buddies he fell on his sword for?
If Wink does a good job at Michigan in 2024, he'll get college HC interviews from good programs.
He may never be HC in the NFL (debatable if he does well in 2024) however colleges will call.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 11:40:15 AMNo one disputed or disagreed with it.
I will say it again: Wink settled for less than what he wanted. He took a pay cut in salary, status, and prestige. His image took a huge hit.
I think things would have turned out differently for him if he had reacted in a much more mature and grounded way than what he did.
Tim,
I have a hard time buying the image of Wink you are painting (a coach with a serious emotional IQ problem) who would storm off after they fired a couple of his key coaches and acted like a "toddler" or "child." I can't see that sort of coach being in such high demand at even the college level and certainly not in such demand as being instantly the highest-paid assistant coach.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 11:44:09 AMDid Wink hire his buddies he fell on his sword for?
I believe both of them got jobs before Wink did
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 12:48:33 PMI believe both of them got jobs before Wink did
Kevin Wilkins was hired by Michigan as Defensive Football Analyst so not an on the field coach. Drew Wilkins was not hired by Michigan.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 22, 2024, 01:10:22 PMKevin Wilkins was hired by Michigan as Defensive Football Analyst so not an on the field coach. Drew Wilkins was not hired by Michigan.
Drew got a job with the Patriots, I believe
to expand on Rich's comment above, Wink's [lack of a] bedside manner will not work with a bunch of 18-20 year olds, many of whom have no shot at the nfl.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 12:47:46 PMTim,
I have a hard time buying the image of Wink you are painting (a coach with a serious emotional IQ problem) who would storm off after they fired a couple of his key coaches and acted like a "toddler" or "child." I can't see that sort of coach being in such high demand at even the college level and certainly not in such demand as being instantly the highest-paid assistant coach.
Clearly you are OK with him telling his boss, "F*ck You", ignoring his calls and texts, and ignoring the calls and texts of the GM. I don't see that as emotionally intelligent at all. It's what immature people do when they don't like something or don't get their way.
With regards to Michigan, or any employer for that matter, it's about weighing the pros and cons. Not a single NFL team with a coordinator or head coaching opening felt Wink's pros outweighed his cons. Michigan did. Good for them and him.
I'm not saying Wink is a despicable human being. He lacks the emotional intelligence to be a leader at the NFL level.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 01:52:38 PMClearly you are OK with him telling his boss, "F*ck You", ignoring his calls and texts, and ignoring the calls and texts of the GM. I don't see that as emotionally intelligent at all. It's what immature people do when they don't like something or don't get their way.
With regards to Michigan, or any employer for that matter, it's about weighing the pros and cons. Not a single NFL team with a coordinator or head coaching opening felt Wink's pros outweighed his cons. Michigan did. Good for them and him.
I'm not saying Wink is a despicable human being. He lacks the emotional intelligence to be a leader at the NFL level.
Tim,
I never would have had the situation where Wink would have told me to go F myself and storm off. As a manager, it's incumbent on me to put the people under me in the best possible position to succeed. So, I never would have dreamed of firing the coaches that Wink worked closely with to generate his weekly game plans.
That is unless I WANTED Wink to tell me to go F myself and wanted him to storm off. Then, I would have done exactly what Brian Daboll did.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 01:59:13 PMTim,
I never would have had the situation where Wink would have told me to go F myself and storm off. As a manager, it's incumbent on me to put the people under me in the best possible position to succeed. So, I never would have dreamed of firing the coaches that Wink worked closely with to generate his weekly game plans.
That is unless I WANTED Wink to tell me to go F myself and wanted him to storm off. Then, I would have done exactly what Brian Daboll did.
You can say that's how you feel but you can't say for certain that it wouldn't happen. You have ZERO control over someone else's reactions. None. Nada. Zilch. You don't get credit or blame for someone's reactions to what you say or do. That is 100% on them. Same with Wink. He is responsible and accountable for his actions regardless of what precipitated it. That concept is clearly lost on you. :surrender:
You can only control your own emotions and responses not those of others or what they say to you or how badly they say it.
If Dabs makes a decision or goes off on Wink in an idiotic or overly emotional way, Wink can't control that but he can control his reaction to it. Is it easy to do? No, but it really is the only way. Frankly, look no farther than the military. Some senior person goes off on a more junior person and that junior person has to take it and say, "yes sir." It's about emotional restraint.
That's the difference between coachable and non-coachable players. Coachable does not take harsh criticisms personally but listens and uses it as constructive feedback to improve.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 02:04:31 PMYou can say that's how you feel but you can't say for certain that it wouldn't happen. You have ZERO control over someone else's reactions. None. Nada. Zilch. You don't get credit or blame for someone's reactions to what you say or do. That is 100% on them. Same with Wink. He is responsible and accountable for his actions regardless of what precipitated it. That concept is clearly lost on you. :surrender:
Tim,
I have 25+ years of experience in management in my paid jobs and 30 years of management in my volunteer work. One thing I know to be true is that I do (to a considerable degree) control how employees will react. Further, a good manager knows how an employee will react. I am almost never (especially after so much experience) caught off guard by how an employee reacts. So I know if I do X, the employee will react Y. In this case, I would have had zero doubt that my firing Wink's right-hand men would piss him off. I don't know how far Wink would go if he was pissed, but in an environment where it's normal for the head coach to yell at his coaches publicly, I would think Wink's reaction was within the realm of predictability.
A prime example- As a very young manager, when I got into an argument, I would go toe to toe with the person, and things would escalate to the point that the person I was arguing with would do something inappropriate. As an older, more experienced, and mature manager, I appreciate that the manager has an obligation to be the grown-up who de-escalates and diffuses the situation to calm things down.
The same thing was true when I did the work in the ambulance. I developed a strong ability to control how my patients would react to me and what they would or wouldn't agree to. I got so good at that aspect that I was once dispatched as a second ambulance to a call because an elderly woman was refusing to go to the hospital when it was clearly a medical necessity. It was a summer morning, and she had passed out in her garden. When I arrived, I could see in her eyes she was ready and itching for a fight over going to the hospital (having just argued with the crew on the scene). Only I did what she didn't expect. I calmly walked to her and sat down next to her on the bench she was sitting on. Instead of talking about going to the hospital, I started talking to her about how lovely her garden was. After a few minutes, I could see the resistance fade and that I was making a connection with her. Only then did I discuss with her the possibility of taking a ride with us to the ER (I never used the word Hospital because that scares people more than an emergency room). Long story short, she went willingly to the hospital.
We like to think we are in control of our actions, and ultimately we are. Still, how you approach people and the words you choose, and the tone you use can greatly influence the reactions of others. It was this ability that made Bill Parcells a Hall of Fame coach with two Super Bowls to his name.
Edit to add-
@Philosophers, I hope you take the time to read what I wrote.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 02:39:46 PMTim,
I have 25+ years of experience in management in my paid jobs and 30 years of management in my volunteer work. One thing I know to be true is that I do (to a considerable degree) control how employees will react. Further, a good manager knows how an employee will react. I am almost never (especially after so much experience) caught off guard by how an employee reacts. So I know if I do X, the employee will react Y. In this case, I would have had zero doubt that my firing Wink's right-hand men would piss him off. I don't know how far Wink would go if he was pissed, but in an environment where it's normal for the head coach to yell at his coaches publicly, I would think Wink's reaction was within the realm of predictability.
A prime example- As a very young manager, when I got into an argument, I would go toe to toe with the person, and things would escalate to the point that the person I was arguing with would do something inappropriate. As an older, more experienced, and mature manager, I appreciate that the manager has an obligation to be the grown-up who de-escalates and diffuses the situation to calm things down.
The same thing was true when I did the work in the ambulance. I developed a strong ability to control how my patients would react to me and what they would or wouldn't agree to. I got so good at that aspect that I was once dispatched as a second ambulance to a call because an elderly woman was refusing to go to the hospital when it was clearly a medical necessity. It was a summer morning, and she had passed out in her garden. When I arrived, I could see in her eyes she was ready and itching for a fight over going to the hospital (having just argued with the crew on the scene). Only I did what she didn't expect. I calmly walked to her and sat down next to her on the bench she was sitting on. Instead of talking about going to the hospital, I started talking to her about how lovely her garden was. After a few minutes, I could see the resistance fade and that I was making a connection with her. Only then did I discuss with her the possibility of taking a ride with us to the ER (I never used the word Hospital because that scares people more than an emergency room). Long story short, she went willingly to the hospital.
We like to think we are in control of our actions, and ultimately we are. Still, how you approach people and the words you choose, and the tone you use can greatly influence the reactions of others. It was this ability that made Bill Parcells a Hall of Fame coach with two Super Bowls to his name.
Edit to add- @Philosophers, I hope you take the time to read what I wrote.
I agree 100% that you need to be mindful of how you approach people so as to prevent any negative blowback or reaction. My guess is Dabs failed to do that. Now, it's on Wink to be restrained in his response. As senior person, Dabs failed in his approach. As junior person, Wink failed in his response.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 22, 2024, 02:58:34 PMI agree 100% that you need to be mindful of how you approach people so as to prevent any negative blowback or reaction. My guess is Dabs failed to do that. Now, it's on Wink to be restrained in his response. As senior person, Dabs failed in his approach. As junior person, Wink failed in his response.
Joe,
I get a sense that the approach Daboll used was intended to get the response they got. If Daboll was thinking of firing Wink's right-hand man (and also his brother for good measure), I would think that it would have started with Daboll calling Wink into his office to discuss off-season firings. Even if Daboll was of the mindset of firing Wink's right-hand man for a good reason, it should have been a decision that, as much as possible, was arrived at mutually rather than Wink being informed of the firing (which was sure to go badly, even if one was less skilled at predicting reactions) I would also add that while telling a boss to go F themselves is improper, reports are that Daboll had frequently MFed Wink. So it's not quite as bad as if Daboll had always carried himself as a professional.
Everyone is commenting as if there's a certainty over how things transpired, when the reality is fans know about 10% of what goes on behind closed doors.
What is certain is that Dabs is an NFL coach and Wink is not. What is also certain is that whether Wink liked it or not - or whether he respected it or not - there is a hierarchy. And the head coach is at the top. Not a single team across his entire career felt Wink was worthy of that job. Daboll landed the top spot in his mid 40s.
Those are the facts. Everything else is conjecture.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 02:39:46 PMTim,
I have 25+ years of experience in management in my paid jobs and 30 years of management in my volunteer work. One thing I know to be true is that I do (to a considerable degree) control how employees will react. Further, a good manager knows how an employee will react. I am almost never (especially after so much experience) caught off guard by how an employee reacts. So I know if I do X, the employee will react Y. In this case, I would have had zero doubt that my firing Wink's right-hand men would piss him off. I don't know how far Wink would go if he was pissed, but in an environment where it's normal for the head coach to yell at his coaches publicly, I would think Wink's reaction was within the realm of predictability.
A prime example- As a very young manager, when I got into an argument, I would go toe to toe with the person, and things would escalate to the point that the person I was arguing with would do something inappropriate. As an older, more experienced, and mature manager, I appreciate that the manager has an obligation to be the grown-up who de-escalates and diffuses the situation to calm things down.
The same thing was true when I did the work in the ambulance. I developed a strong ability to control how my patients would react to me and what they would or wouldn't agree to. I got so good at that aspect that I was once dispatched as a second ambulance to a call because an elderly woman was refusing to go to the hospital when it was clearly a medical necessity. It was a summer morning, and she had passed out in her garden. When I arrived, I could see in her eyes she was ready and itching for a fight over going to the hospital (having just argued with the crew on the scene). Only I did what she didn't expect. I calmly walked to her and sat down next to her on the bench she was sitting on. Instead of talking about going to the hospital, I started talking to her about how lovely her garden was. After a few minutes, I could see the resistance fade and that I was making a connection with her. Only then did I discuss with her the possibility of taking a ride with us to the ER (I never used the word Hospital because that scares people more than an emergency room). Long story short, she went willingly to the hospital.
We like to think we are in control of our actions, and ultimately we are. Still, how you approach people and the words you choose, and the tone you use can greatly influence the reactions of others. It was this ability that made Bill Parcells a Hall of Fame coach with two Super Bowls to his name.
Edit to add- @Philosophers, I hope you take the time to read what I wrote.
Rich,
I appreciate you sharing your background.
The bottom line is that even if we aren't always in control of our actions, we are always 100% responsible. It seems that you are holding Daboll accountable for his actions and absolving Wink of his. They were both wrong. I think you know that. It also seems to me that while you have previously acknowledged that Wink was wrong, you take it a step further to state who you feel is
more wrong, as if to justify Wink's reaction.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 03:08:57 PMJoe,
I get a sense that the approach Daboll used was intended to get the response they got. If Daboll was thinking of firing Wink's right-hand man (and also his brother for good measure), I would think that it would have started with Daboll calling Wink into his office to discuss off-season firings. Even if Daboll was of the mindset of firing Wink's right-hand man for a good reason, it should have been a decision that, as much as possible, was arrived at mutually rather than Wink being informed of the firing (which was sure to go badly, even if one was less skilled at predicting reactions) I would also add that while telling a boss to go F themselves is improper, reports are that Daboll had frequently MFed Wink. So it's not quite as bad as if Daboll had always carried himself as a professional.
If you argued that in court, it would be met with a sustained objection.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 01:59:13 PMTim,
I never would have had the situation where Wink would have told me to go F myself and storm off. As a manager, it's incumbent on me to put the people under me in the best possible position to succeed. So, I never would have dreamed of firing the coaches that Wink worked closely with to generate his weekly game plans.
That is unless I WANTED Wink to tell me to go F myself and wanted him to storm off. Then, I would have done exactly what Brian Daboll did.
It sounds like your management experience is limited to small teams, performing similar functions. As someone with 26 years of leadership experience, who's currently responsible for thousands of young men and women, from different social-economic backgrounds, from all over the world, I strongly disagree with your perspective. As a leader, you can do everything correctly, and still fail to achieve a desired outcome. It's simply not as easy as you describe it. There are some people who simply don't want to be led, and conduct themselves accordingly.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 03:32:55 PMIf you argued that in court, it would be met with a sustained objection.
Tim,
If Daboll didn't know that was the reaction he was going to get, then he is guilty of gross incompetence. Daboll doesn't strike me as an unintelligent man, so that's why I believe he knew what he was doing.
As I said, I have been around the block more than a few times. I have literally seen less honorable organizations use similar tactics to get an employee to lose their cool to get them to quit in the heat of the movement or behave in a way that gave the organization grounds to terminate.
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 03:34:54 PMIt sounds like your management experience is limited to small teams, performing similar functions. As someone with 26 years of leadership experience, who's currently responsible for thousands of young men and women, from different social-economic backgrounds, from all over the world, I strongly disagree with your perspective. As a leader, you can do everything correctly, and still fail to achieve a desired outcome. It's simply not as easy as you describe it. There are some people who simply don't want to be led, and conduct themselves accordingly.
It sounds like you didn't enjoy the benefits fo the mentorships I was lucky enough to receive. My first mentor drilled it into me that I was hired to solve problems, not give excuses. To me, "I did everything correctly but still failed to achieve the outcome" is just that, an excuse.
One thing I learned in life is that leadership is not well taught in colleges. It is well taught by quality mentors, and I was fortunate enough to have two very good ones. Hell, even the language you used, "doing everything correctly," indicates a lack of appreciation of the concept that one size doesn't fit all. You need to customize your approach to the person you are dealing with.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 03:36:13 PMTim,
If Daboll didn't know that was the reaction he was going to get, then he is guilty of gross incompetence. Daboll doesn't strike me as an unintelligent man, so that's why I believe he knew what he was doing.
As I said, I have been around the block more than a few times. I have literally seen less honorable organizations use similar tactics to get an employee to lose their cool to get them to quit in the heat of the movement or behave in a way that gave the organization grounds to terminate.
So, Daboll put a block of Colby Jack on a mouse trap and Wink was hankering for a hunk of cheese. Wink allowed himself to be manipulated in such a way that he acted in line with his character. Got it. Wink was playing checkers and Dabs was playing chess. :ok:
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 03:40:55 PMIt sounds like you didn't enjoy the benefits fo the mentorships I was lucky enough to receive. My first mentor drilled it into me that I was hired to solve problems, not give excuses. To me, "I did everything correctly but still failed to achieve the outcome" is just that, an excuse.
One thing I learned in life is that leadership is not well taught in colleges. It is well taught by quality mentors, and I was fortunate enough to have two very good ones. Hell, even the language you used, "doing everything correctly," indicates a lack of appreciation of the concept that one size doesn't fit all. You need to customize your approach to the person you are dealing with.
Rich,
I enjoyed the mentorship of some of the finest leaders this nation has ever produced; Thanks to those men and women, I am now entrusted with the wellbeing and development of thousands of men and women. When it comes to leadership, you're not in position to lecture me. Here's what I know, any leader who claims they can control every situation, and/or personality, has never had any real leadership responsibility, or is lying.
I simply can't control the actions of the thousands of people I lead. I set the culture, truly care about every soul, and trust the leaders below me. Still, there will always be a small percentage that deviate from the standard. We hold them accountable. The same is true for Wink; he was held accountable for HIS actions.
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 03:56:33 PMRich,
I enjoyed the mentorship of some of the finest leaders this nation has ever produced; Thanks to those men and women, I am now entrusted with the wellbeing and development of thousands of men and women. When it comes to leadership, you're not in position to lecture me. Here's what I know, any leader who claims they can control every situation, and/or personality, has never had any real leadership responsibility, or is lying.
I simply can't control the actions of the thousands of people I lead. I set the culture, truly care about every soul, and trust the leaders below me. Still, there will always be a small percentage that deviate from the standard. We hold them accountable. The same is true for Wink; he was held accountable for HIS actions.
Unfortunately this is the response I expected and it's my cue to bow out of this discussion.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 03:48:56 PMSo, Daboll put a block of Colby Jack on a mouse trap and Wink was hankering for a hunk of cheese. Wink allowed himself to be manipulated in such a way that he acted in line with his character. Got it. Wink was playing checkers and Dabs was playing chess. :ok:
Tim,
I am not going to dispute your characterization. I will say based on my values, how I believe people should be treated, and how I believe power/authority should be wielded, Daboll was very wrong.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 04:32:18 PMUnfortunately this is the response I expected and it's my cue to bow out of this discussion.
You made assumptions and started lecturing without asking about my leadership experiences. If you bothered to inquire, you may appreciate I have a lot of experience in this field. I appreciate you simply don't like being challenged; however, I don't understand what prompted your sarcastic response.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 22, 2024, 04:39:16 PMTim,
I am not going to dispute your characterization. I will say based on my values, how I believe people should be treated, and how I believe power/authority should be wielded, Daboll was very wrong.
Yes, Daboll was wrong. He wasn't alone. And as I already mentioned several times, the NFL teams who had available positions and did not hire, let alone interview Wink, did not like how he handled himself. Now he's out of the league.
Actions taken and consequences suffered.
Quote from: T200 on March 22, 2024, 04:57:26 PMYes, Daboll was wrong. He wasn't alone. And as I already mentioned several times, the NFL teams who had available positions and did not hire, let alone interview Wink, did not like how he handled himself. Now he's out of the league.
Actions taken and consequences suffered.
Very well stated, Tim; you did far better job at capturing my sentiments than my crude posts.
Quote from: kingm56 on March 22, 2024, 05:07:57 PMVery well stated, Tim; you did far better job at capturing my sentiments than my crude posts.
You're good. 👍🏾
Not all messages are well-received no matter the messenger.
I'm not fond of the idea of a leader touting his leadership skills any more than I am in judging or passing blame on someone I don't know and have never met. I might find that to be a bit presumptuous and possibly self-aggrandizing, which would not correspond to my notion of leadership. Of course, to each his own.
Indeed, I have never regarded leadership as something to be claimed. More often, I find it reflected in a willingness of others to follow another in their own best interest whether or know it at the time. It may exhibit as a natural quality with some, but quite often it's evident only as a unique event.
Cheers!
Quote from: Painter on March 22, 2024, 09:32:32 PMI'm not fond of the idea of a leader touting his leadership skills any more than I am in judging or passing blame on someone I don't know and have never met. I might find that to be a bit presumptuous and possibly self-aggrandizing, which would not correspond to my notion of leadership. Of course, to each his own.
Indeed, I have never regarded leadership as something to be claimed. More often, I find it reflected in a willingness of others to follow another in their own best interest whether or know it at the time. It may exhibit as a natural quality with some, but quite often it's evident only as a unique event.
Cheers!
Larry,
I think you make a fair point. You can claim all sorts of leadership credentials, but if you don't demonstrate an understanding of leadership, it's all meaningless.
From my perspective, blaming Wink for Brian Daboll's shortcomings was just a PR stunt by NYG (which clearly some fans have bought into). For the sake of the team, I hope it was just a PR stunt. I hope behind the bluster, there is a serious effort to correct Daboll's glaring deficiencies as there was Tom Coughlin's. If there isn't, the Giants will be on a path of more futility and a new HC in the near future. There is no way Daboll will enjoy sustained success until he learns to control his own emotions and outbursts, treats his coaching staff with respect, and behaves in a genuine and sincere manner. The team needs everyone to row in the right direction happily. So, it's a small condolence to point out that the player is still following the head coach if the coaching staff is miserable, underperforming, and lacking proper leadership.
I think your debate on leadership is at different levels.
Rich sounds like he managed smaller teams. King managed if I had to guess maybe large military groups.
I've also managed teams as well.
Where I think your debate goes awry is that once you set the top level parameters a larger group means less ability to be mindful of individual behavior which mY threaten the team.
If you are managing a 20 person team, I see faces, talk to each all the time and can observe them and get in front of problems.
If You are managing 10,000 people, once you set the top parameters and create a layered structure with good people you are very unlikely able to get ahead of poor behavior of individuals unless they are direct reports.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 23, 2024, 11:14:56 AMI think your debate on leadership is at different levels.
Rich sounds like he managed smaller teams. King managed if I had to guess maybe large military groups.
I've also managed teams as well.
Where I think your debate goes awry is that once you set the top level parameters a larger group means less ability to be mindful of individual behavior which mY threaten the team.
If you are managing a 20 person team, I see faces, talk to each all the time and can observe them and get in front of problems.
If You are managing 10,000 people, once you set the top parameters and create a layered structure with good people you are very unlikely able to get ahead of poor behavior of individuals unless they are direct reports.
Joe,
The thing with the NFL is there is game day. That sort of high-pressure, time-sensitive management situation is very different than your typical office job. I say that because I was put in even higher-pressure situations where lives were on the line, and time was critical in my management experience in emergency medical services, heavy rescue, and mass causality situations. Being an NFL head coach is a combination of day-to-day management of what you would call "smaller teams" and the high-pressure high stakes management of game days.
I ended my conversation with King (and I have no idea what his story is) because he made it clear his mind is firmly shut to anything I have to say or points I would make despite my reasonable qualifications to do so.
With Daboll, I see two issues. One is his game-day management. Daboll gets too emotional, and when you are in those high-stress situations, you must remain in control and calm. Sure, a planned show of anger toward a call or unhappiness toward a player (when you feel it's beneficial) is okay, but you have to be the anchor for your unit. If you reach the point with Daboll where he literally told a reporter he was so upset he couldn't think straight, you are doing a disservice to your team (also, if you are yelling on the headphones or giving coaches grief instead of guidance during the game).
The other issue I have with Daboll is from all I hear; he is letting his ego get in the way of being a good manager and leader. I learned very early on that you can't have an ego and be a good leader or an effective manager. Every decision and interaction needs to be towards your organization's goals, not to pay homage to your ego. Some of the stories that have leaked out about what has gone on with the Giants show me that Daboll is a man who has yet to learn that lesson.
One other point: I don't share my qualifications to give them false credibility. I share my credentials to show I speak from experience, but I still carefully explain the how and why of my points. I never ask anyone to take what I say on blind faith.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 23, 2024, 11:14:56 AMI think your debate on leadership is at different levels.
Rich sounds like he managed smaller teams. King managed if I had to guess maybe large military groups.
I've also managed teams as well.
Where I think your debate goes awry is that once you set the top level parameters a larger group means less ability to be mindful of individual behavior which mY threaten the team.
If you are managing a 20 person team, I see faces, talk to each all the time and can observe them and get in front of problems.
If You are managing 10,000 people, once you set the top parameters and create a layered structure with good people you are very unlikely able to get ahead of poor behavior of individuals unless they are direct reports.
Joe,
I was going to type something very similar; however, it failed to be as precise as your post. I would like to add one caveat: IMO, it doesn't matter if you lead/manage 10,000 or 10 people, the actions of others are sometimes decoupled from leaders' actions. I also think it's incredibly naive to believe a leader can control the actions of thier subordinates. Four-star generals and CEOs of fortune 250 companies don't have this power. Perhaps they failed to enjoy the appropriate mentorship, or individuals sometimes act on thier own self-interest/morals. 20 years of experience has led me to believe the latter is true.
I am also incredibly skeptical of any leader who believe they can control every person and/or situation...that leader does not exist.
Fundamentally, I doubt Wink will ever be an effective leader as poor followers rarely become good leaders; I suspect his limited emotional intelligence and poor followership is why he was fired from Balt, NY and has yet to achieve his goal of becoming an NFL coach.
Regardless, exceptionally good post.
Quote from: Painter on March 22, 2024, 09:32:32 PMI'm not fond of the idea of a leader touting his leadership skills any more than I am in judging or passing blame on someone I don't know and have never met. I might find that to be a bit presumptuous and possibly self-aggrandizing, which would not correspond to my notion of leadership. Of course, to each his own.
Indeed, I have never regarded leadership as something to be claimed. More often, I find it reflected in a willingness of others to follow another in their own best interest whether or know it at the time. It may exhibit as a natural quality with some, but quite often it's evident only as a unique event.
Cheers!
This was very much in line with my thoughts while reading through this thread. People who tout their own leadership skills usually (as in, I'd say 95% of the time) are the ones with the enormous egos that their subordinates roll their eyes at when they're not looking their direction.
Quote from: PSUBeirut on March 23, 2024, 12:16:48 PMThis was very much in line with my thoughts while reading through this thread. People who tout their own leadership skills usually (as in, I'd say 95% of the time) are the ones with the enormous egos that their subordinates roll their eyes at when they're not looking their direction.
As I said, you can't be a good leader and feed your ego.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 23, 2024, 11:40:54 AMJoe,
The thing with the NFL is there is game day. That sort of high-pressure, time-sensitive management situation is very different than your typical office job. I say that because I was put in even higher-pressure situations where lives were on the line, and time was critical in my management experience in emergency medical services, heavy rescue, and mass causality situations. Being an NFL head coach is a combination of day-to-day management of what you would call "smaller teams" and the high-pressure high stakes management of game days.
I ended my conversation with King (and I have no idea what his story is) because he made it clear his mind is firmly shut to anything I have to say or points I would make despite my reasonable qualifications to do so.
With Daboll, I see two issues. One is his game-day management. Daboll gets too emotional, and when you are in those high-stress situations, you must remain in control and calm. Sure, a planned show of anger toward a call or unhappiness toward a player (when you feel it's beneficial) is okay, but you have to be the anchor for your unit. If you reach the point with Daboll where he literally told a reporter he was so upset he couldn't think straight, you are doing a disservice to your team (also, if you are yelling on the headphones or giving coaches grief instead of guidance during the game).
The other issue I have with Daboll is from all I hear; he is letting his ego get in the way of being a good manager and leader. I learned very early on that you can't have an ego and be a good leader or an effective manager. Every decision and interaction needs to be towards your organization's goals, not to pay homage to your ego. Some of the stories that have leaked out about what has gone on with the Giants show me that Daboll is a man who has yet to learn that lesson.
One other point: I don't share my qualifications to give them false credibility. I share my credentials to show I speak from experience, but I still carefully explain the how and why of my points. I never ask anyone to take what I say on blind faith.
Rich - i agree with all of what you just wrote but with one caveat. Some of the greatest leaders had large egos. George Patton, Douglas MacArthur, Steve Jobs, etc. A leader can have an ego though less ideal. What he cant have is self-preservation over team.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 23, 2024, 12:42:48 PMAs I said, you can't be a good leader and feed your ego.
Clearly, you missed his point.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 23, 2024, 12:59:22 PMRich - i agree with all of what you just wrote but with one caveat. Some of the greatest leaders had large egos. George Patton, Douglas MacArthur, Steve Jobs, etc. A leader can have an ego though less ideal. What he cant have is self-preservation over team.
Spot on, Joe! There is no 'right' way to lead. It's an art, not a science. As you stated, Patton was a completely different type of leader than Omar Bradley, both highly effective.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 23, 2024, 12:59:22 PMRich - i agree with all of what you just wrote but with one caveat. Some of the greatest leaders had large egos. George Patton, Douglas MacArthur, Steve Jobs, etc. A leader can have an ego though less ideal. What he cant have is self-preservation over team.
Fair point
Although, there are really two aspects. There is having a large ego, and then there is one who uses one's position to feed that ego. It's the latter that usually causes the behavior detrimental to leadership.
QuoteI also think it's incredibly naive to believe a leader can control the actions of thier subordinates.
I would like the people who are discussing leadership here to think about their own lives and experience.
Have you ever had a boss who treated you in a way that made you lose your temper or perhaps work less?
Have you had a boss or teacher that inspired you to work harder?
Circling back to football, consider how the Raiders played at the beginning of the season on Josh McDaniels, and then consider how that same group of men played under Antonio Pierce with the same coaching staff and the same play calling.
There is a reason that both leadership and management are taught. People in charge very much can influence the people under them and they get people to do what they need them to do (at least the good ones or competent ones can).
QuoteI doubt Wink will ever be an effective leader
Here is another comment that one should consider the facts as we know them. Wink has a long and successful football career, starting in the college ranks. His players consistently played hard for him, developed well, and, with the exception of McKinney, have sung his praises. If one considers what Wink's job is, it is mind-boggling to believe someone would claim he was a poor leader. Plus the college champion Michigan team hired him as their DC. I seriously doubt a proven winner would hire a man with no leadership skills.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 23, 2024, 01:28:12 PMFair point
Although, there are really two aspects. There is having a large ego, and then there is one who uses one's position to feed that ego. It's the latter that usually causes the behavior detrimental to leadership.
Rich - I would argue Patton fed that ego with his leadership. For example, trying to beat Montgomery to a designated town from different directions. Nothing wrong with that so long as he is willing to die alongside those he leads. A person who believes his self-preservation is more important than those he leads is not a leader.
Quote from: kingm56 on March 23, 2024, 01:12:02 PMSpot on, Joe! There is no 'right' way to lead. It's an art, not a science. As you stated, Patton was a completely different type of leader than Omar Bradley, both highly effective.
100% agree with you.
Quote from: Philosophers on March 23, 2024, 01:38:20 PMRich - I would argue Patton fed that ego with his leadership. For example, trying to beat Montgomery to a designated town from different directions. Nothing wrong with that so long as he is willing to die alongside those he leads. A person who believes his self-preservation is more important than those he leads is not a leader.
Joe,
It can be tricky to really judge Patton's motives. We have to remember that the US army that entered WW2 wasn't the world-beater that we have today. They were a quickly cobbled-together force (we didn't have a large standing army prior to WW2) that was late to the party, so to speak (the Brits had been fighting for years before the US joined in). It's possible that part of the getting to the town first was the result of Patton feeding his ego, but he could have also been doing so to build up his own army's morale and confidence.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 23, 2024, 01:28:12 PMFair point
Although, there are really two aspects. There is having a large ego, and then there is one who uses one's position to feed that ego. It's the latter that usually causes the behavior detrimental to leadership.
Quote from: MightyGiants on March 23, 2024, 01:36:33 PMHave you had a boss or teacher that inspired you to work harder?
There is a reason that both leadership and management are taught. People in charge very much can influence the people under them and they get people to do what they need them to do (at least the good ones or competent ones can).
Here is another comment that one should consider the facts as we know them. Wink has a long and successful football career, starting in the college ranks. His players consistently played hard for him, developed well, and, with the exception of McKinney, have sung his praises. If one considers what Wink's job is, it is mind-boggling to believe someone would claim he was a poor leader. Plus the college champion Michigan team hired him as their DC. I seriously doubt a proven winner would hire a man with no leadership skills.
To point 1: Like everyone here, I've worked for some terrible leaders; however, we have zero control over others' actions. What we control is how we react to the environment they created. To the best of our abilities, we should strive to comport ourselves as professionals. Interesting enough, I believe we can learn more from bad leaders, than really good ones. I suspect leaders recognize and reward those who carry themselves as professionals, regardless of the circumstances.
Wink failed to do so, and as a result, was 'fired' for the second time in 3 years. Further, no NFL team expressed a desire to add his 'leadership' to their team.
Point 2: Yes, Wink had a long and successful career. However, despite the latter, and despite getting NUMEROUS HC interviews, he was never hired to the role. Clearly, there's something lacking as his contemporaries, with less success, were hired as HCs.
Being exceptional at your job, does not make you a good leader. Clearly, no NFL team thought Wink had the qualities to lead their team, and now, he's completely out of the NFL. Moreover, he was only effective when paired with HoF talent, without multiple AP/HoF, he's been fired 2x in 3 years and led two bottom 5 defenses for two consecutive seasons. The same thing happened to Sean Payton and Bill B. They were exceptional at their jobs, as long as they had superior talent. Without it, they led dumpster fires. Odd how that works..,