What Is "The Culture" And How Do You Fix It?

[EspenK]

I have no idea what the culture of the Jacket organization is. I'm pretty sure most if not all the posters here have no real idea either. I'm guessing there are a few sub-cultures that exist.The most important one being the team culture made up of the players and the coaches. That culture should be what Not Wendelll said earlier -"Culture the behavior you allow, the behavior you reward, and the behavior you won't stand for. It's defined and reinforced every single day." I also think Jax got it right in the post above "Culture is a way of adhering to a set of self governing or self discipline handed down between players. The captain is in charge of culture as well as leaders on team. A coach is also involved. Hierarchy on a team or anywhere else sets the standard."

Get the right coach who can relate to his players on their level not his and have players who buy into what the coach is saying and "culture" issues go away.

I think it is also incumbent on the GM to make sure he understands the team culture or chemistry if you will and staff the roster with players that fit. I'm not sure Jarmo has done a good job of this.

All of the other culture issues that have been put forth are not all that important imo.

 

[NotWendell]

Lol. Did they have a discount on hot takes?

What are you talking about Lee?

I thought it was obvious. Look around at the quality of: the roster, the prospect pool, the banners in the rafters, the marketing, the arena experience, the broadcast team (except for Jody Shelley), the locker room, the front office, the Chiller ice facilities, employing a coach who doesn't want to be here for a full year and so on. Good enough is good enough - certainly none of these items are at elite levels compared to the rest of the league.

These things by themselves are not culture. The common thread (the acceptance of 'good enough') is our culture.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

My problem with culture is that we only think we see it or know it because of on ice/field results. We don't actually see culture. We see results. Winning teams magically have good culture and losing teams obviously do not. That just strikes me as some really trite romantic sports media driven b.s. And more than a little self-mythologizing in some cases.

Draft and develop well. Use your assets wisely -- especially for a market like Columbus that's probably going to be a bottom 10 destination for many for the foreseeable future -- and generate sustainable results.

You do that well enough and "culture" will flow from there simply because sports writers will line up to write really pat articles about the "Jackets way" or other somesuch marketing moniker to try to explain it. And give folks personalized cupcakes on their birthdays. Cuz it can't hurt.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Not how it works in hockey. There's a lot of parity, and teams go up and down all the time. The best teams are built around players they drafted. And when those players are past their primes, they either replace them with equal talent through the draft or they're toast. "Fielding a winning product" doesn't transcend the star players you drafted.

Detroit is toast. Chicago is toast. L.A. is toast. That's your best teams of 10 years ago. Well Pittsburgh and Washington, but they will probably be toast soon.

No CBJ ownership is not at the root of the problem. I'm totally f***in miffed that it's even a topic. We might have the best ownership in sports.

I disagree. I think the best ownership in sports is the Rooney family with the Steelers, maybe followed by the Ilitch family in Detroit.
The Rooneys begin with a vision that includes the team's persona. The people in operations, the front office, the scouts and the coaches all understand the vision. Players are drafted according to their fit with the team's persona. As I was once told by one of them at a social event, they don't draft the best player available, they draft the best Steeler available.
I think the Ilitch family invested in the things you and I can't see like scouting. Clearly they built their roster in the 90s through a few years ago based on how they decided to play. Did the roster finally age out? Sure, but they are building back to that same vision.

 

[DarkandStormy]

No idea what "the culture" is. I know they tried to stamp out the "country club" mentality that sort of plagued the back end of the Nash years. There is also a lot of talk, seemingly every year, about the team "identity" and I think this team has no clue what there identity is now.

I don't follow other teams every day, but are there other GMs who openly talk about "wielding the hammer" in RFA negotiations like Jarmo? I get that he has the CBA on his side - which he has spoken about publicly several times - but what if the treatment of RFA players in those negotiations sours the whole room and has led to this "no one wants to play here" narrative? We're talking about, what, maybe a few hundred thousand dollars a year on some of these deals? If that plays a part of it, maybe you sacrifice those dollars in the RFA years so that guys will actually be willing to sign as UFAs. That's the part of this whole "loyalty" and "we want guys who want to be here" talking points that just don't make any sense. Sure, guys want to be here...if you aren't a hard ass in negotiations and telling reporters you're going to "wield the hammer." And loyalty obviously doesn't go both ways equally.

I don't know what the answer is, but I do wonder if Jarmo took a more comprehensive approach to contract negotiations if this stigma wouldn't be out there about the franchise. And again, it's maybe a few hundred thousand dollars a year. That's an expense worth paying to avoid the situation we're in now. Instead, Jarmo treats these negotiations as battles he has to win (Wennberg and Bjorkstrand mostly are the exceptions, if I'm remembering right).

The UFAs he signed, I think, are:
-Atkinson (internally in his walk year)
-Horton (outside signing on July 5)
-Foligno (internally in his walk year)
-Dubinsky (internally 10 days after he was eligible to sign)
-Nyquist (outside signing on July 1)
-Nash (outside signing on July 1)
-Boll (internally in his walk year)

Beyond that, you're talking about a bunch of 1-2 year deals on some reclamation projects or tweeners.

 

[DarkandStormy]

This talking point is so tired. You'll get players who want to be here by winning, not the other way around.

 

[GoJackets1]

View attachment 442251

This talking point is so tired. You'll get players who want to be here by winning, not the other way around.

Not to mention, clearly just drafting a guy is not enough to get them to want to stay.

 

[NotWendell]

What about Columbus is so hard to understand?

 

[Monk]

What about Columbus is so hard to understand?

I think it's pretty easy. If you're less than 30 and a millionaire, Columbus is probably not where you'd prefer to be.

 

[NotWendell]

I think it's pretty easy. If you're less than 30 and a millionaire, Columbus is probably not where you'd prefer to be.

Change that to multi-millionaire and I agree with you. When I got out of college, I wanted to go back to New England where I interned. My best job offer by far was from Columbus. I wasn't excited about it. But I took the job, fell in love with the city and never left.

 

[Monk]

Change that to multi-millionaire and I agree with you. When I got out of college, I wanted to go back to New England where I interned. My best job offer by far was from Columbus. I wasn't excited about it. But I took the job, fell in love with the city and never left.

So Columbus could have given you the best offer, but if New England was almost as good, you would have gone to New England?

...sounds familiar

 

[Monstershockey]

View attachment 442251

This talking point is so tired. You'll get players who want to be here by winning, not the other way around.

While winning is a good thing, at that point it becomes winning + dollars. If another team comes along and is winning also, and can pay more, the player will go to the money. Sometimes on his own, because that is what he wants, or sometimes because his agent steers him there, because the agent wants a payday also, or he gets pressure from his family to get more. There still has to be other things that would want to make him stay. What that is would probably depend on the player.

 

[Nanabijou]

I know Jarmo has talked about using the 'hammer' and I agree that this is something that needs to go away. Hopefully he has learned and will keep these discussions out of the media. But honestly, when I think back, I'm glad he used the 'hammer' in many of these negotiations, like with Johansen.

The only one I wish he'd done differently is Josh Anderson. I felt he was underpaid and forced into a 3 year deal. He had done enough to merit a 1 or or 2 year contract if they were holding firm on the bridge. Give me another RFA that you felt was unfairly punished by Jarmo in RFA negotiations, maybe I'm forgetting someone. Bjork, Jones, Werenski, Gavrikov, Korpi, Elvis all seem like fair contracts that there wasn't a lot of angst over (yes, I remember ZW negotiation went a little prolonged).

 

[KJ Dangler]

Not to mention, clearly just drafting a guy is not enough to get them to want to stay.

Thats why you load up on elite prospects/ picks all at once, these guys all come in build towards something. We are so delusional here. Weve had a coach that takes the skill out of the game, our biggest acheivement was squeaking into the playoffs as an 8 seed, and beating a good team in Tampa in the first round. And thats your ceiling with Torts/ that style, and the makeup of the roster. You start drafting some Elite players, and have lots of picks and prospects, they know they can achieve their goals here and will stay. Bottom Line... Look at the Cleveland Browns... now players all want to go there.

 

[Crede777]

I know Jarmo has talked about using the 'hammer' and I agree that this is something that needs to go away. Hopefully he has learned and will keep these discussions out of the media. But honestly, when I think back, I'm glad he used the 'hammer' in many of these negotiations, like with Johansen.

The only one I wish he'd done differently is Josh Anderson. I felt he was underpaid and forced into a 3 year deal. He had done enough to merit a 1 or or 2 year contract if they were holding firm on the bridge. Give me another RFA that you felt was unfairly punished by Jarmo in RFA negotiations, maybe I'm forgetting someone. Bjork, Jones, Werenski, Gavrikov, Korpi, Elvis all seem like fair contracts that there wasn't a lot of angst over (yes, I remember ZW negotiation went a little prolonged).

It's all speculation, but I really think Anderson's injury had a lot to do with the issues regarding his contract.

Coming off his ELC they hammered him down into taking less money on a bridge "prove it" deal. Then, in a contract year, he was seriously injured. Then the Jackets cited his injury and low numbers that season as a reason why they weren't willing to offer him the $7 million x 7 years deal he wanted. That fed into a feeling of a lack of loyalty from the team.

PLD meanwhile was quite close to Anderson and Werenski. Which may explain the about face when he bought a really nice condo in Columbus - thinking they were going to give him a big deal. Then they may have come at him with the same tactic they used against Anderson. That plus him being able to see that other teams may have been willing to give him that big deal and he felt a similar lack of loyalty.

Again, all speculation but that's how I fit the pieces together with the understanding that it wasn't Torts and it wasn't the city itself for why they wanted out.

 

[Forepar]

I’ll just be interested to see what people think can be done on this front. I had a friend who worked 20 years in marketing for the CBJ. She pitched me every week a story about a player doing something in the community. I wrote about the cancer benefit where young cancer patients and players did a fashion show. I wrote about Scott Hartnell’s foundation. I wrote about players reading at libraries. I did a Q&A with Jones and Jenner about their favorite off-ice stuff to do. That’s a pittance compared to what the department was doing.

So anyway, I’m sure they will appreciate hearing all the ways they fell short over the years.

Sarcasm aside, I have yet to have someone explain to me what “marketing players better” actually means. It’s a buzz phrase tossed around but it’s not really that simple. I asked the question in the thread about that Athletic piece with the three former players. It’s a topic in which I have interest, is what I’m trying to say.

I realize the things I mentioned above may seem more like things a player is obligated to do but again, I’ve yet to hear a quality explanation of what this means.

Also, apologies, because “culture” could mean a lot more than “marketing” but it was brought up in the OP.

In my mind, the "marketing players better" is simply to get JK out of the marketing, period. In the past I have not cared a lick, did not even notice it, but in the past 2 years CBJ promos that have JK doing the voiceover have become ad nauseum. The intended theme is that it's all about the team, not any one individual player. That is all good to a point. The problem is that one individual GM (JK) has now become the face of the franchise in recent months. Maybe that is/was the result of the pandemic - but JK should not be the face of the franchise. He's the "out of our blue," he wields the hammer, he is the only constant. Foligno did pizza but not CBJ promo stuff. The players (plural on purpose) should be the focus of those spots. It likely is not a $$ issue for the players - although the more they are seen in CBJ promos and associated with success, the more valuable they become to the business community to do commercials, etc.... At times it just seems a message of respect (or lack thereof) - JK is bigger than anyone else in the room. And that's the wrong message, he should be in the back seat smiling about his players when they are successful. IMO, that is the "culture" issue that needs to change in order to get buy-in from players for the long haul. And for some reason it bothers me now. That means it likely has entered the thoughts of at least a few players. I also agree with several who say WINNING is the thing that will change the culture. But you've got to keep your top players during their prime years to have the best chance to win the whole thing - and thus changing culture, changing management's attitude (JK) toward players has to happen first (or at least simultaneously).

I'm not advocating firing JK - but there needs to be a fundamental change in tone from CBJ management, in marketing, in public relations generally, in contract negotiations (at least publicly).
I like JD, but not convinced he changes JK's control of the culture enough or fast enough. My 2 cents.

 

[Forepar]

I'm not sure what the solution is because I have no idea what's broken, except some of the things appropriately listed as unfixable. I'm also not 100% confident that there is something broken that needs to be fixed.

I'm mostly just eager to see what the next 1-2 years are like with a new coach and go from there.

I agree, but I'm not convinced changing the coach was/is the answer. Oh, I readily acknowledge that a coaching change had to happen after the way this season played out (Torts playing out the string), but it felt almost pre-ordained. JK gave Torts a horrible roster fit - and whether you want to blame PLD or JK for that, it was not a coaching issue that started the death spiral.

 

[KJ Dangler]

Amazing…..

 

[KJ Dangler]

I agree, but I'm not convinced changing the coach was/is the answer. Oh, I readily acknowledge that a coaching change had to happen after the way this season played out (Torts playing out the string), but it felt almost pre-ordained. JK gave Torts a horrible roster fit - and whether you want to blame PLD or JK for that, it was not a coaching issue that started the death spiral.

Oh it was the answer for sure , Torts never should have been brought in . Instead of rebuilding properly , we had moderate success taking all the skill out of the game , to be borderline competitive. Yet 5 yrs later , our crowning Jewel was squeaking in as 8th seed and beating Tampa

 

[5th Line Fanatic]

I've been thinking about if I was an NHL player in my early 20s, where would I want to go if I could pick anywhere and the money was the same. Columbus wouldn't be my first choice, but it would be in the top half.


Anaheim Ducks-no
Arizona Coyotes-yes
Boston Bruins-no
Buffalo Sabres-no way in Hell
Calgary Flames-no way in Hell
Carolina Hurricanes-yes
Chicago Blackhawks-yes
Colorado Avalanche-yes
Columbus Blue Jackets- yes, I already made this choice in my early 20s, before Columbus had the Arena District, Short North (as it is today), etc. The Zoo did not factor in my decision.
Dallas Stars-yes
Detroit Red Wings-no
Edmonton Oilers-no way in Hell
Florida Panthers-yes
Los Angeles Kings-yes
Minnesota Wild-no
Montreal Canadiens-no
Nashville Predators-yes
New Jersey Devils-no
New York Islanders-no
New York Rangers-yes
Ottawa Senators-no
Philadelphia Flyers-no
Pittsburgh Penguins-no
San Jose Sharks-yes
St. Louis Blues-no
Tampa Bay Lightning-yes
Toronto Maple Leafs-no, but hockey players probably disagree.
Vancouver Canucks-yes
Vegas Golden Knights-yes
Washington Capitals-yes
Winnipeg Jets-no way in Hell
Seattle Kraken-no

 

[Monstershockey]

Oh it was the answer for sure , Torts never should have been brought in . Instead of rebuilding properly , we had moderate success taking all the skill out of the game , to be borderline competitive. Yet 5 yrs later , our crowning Jewel was squeaking in as 8th seed and beating Tampa

And yet a team with Matthews, Marner, Tavares, and Nylander, plus a top 10 power play, couldn't beat them last year. Plus they couldn't score on Korpisalo twice, including the deciding game. Then all that skill, minus Tavares, couldn't get past Montreal this year. Your logic is way off. There is way more to creating a winning team than just loading it with skill players. If you get a coach that can't handle the egos, or ypur skill players can't play defense, than you might as well forget it.

 

[KJ Dangler]

And yet a team with Matthews, Marner, Tavares, and Nylander, plus a top 10 power play, couldn't beat them last year. Plus they couldn't score on Korpisalo twice, including the deciding game. Then all that skill, minus Tavares, couldn't get past Montreal this year. Your logic is way off. There is way more to creating a winning team than just loading it with skill players. If you get a coach that can't handle the egos, or ypur skill players can't play defense, than you might as well forget it.

Never said that . I said in retrospect our crowning jewel has been squeaking in as an 8 seed , and winning a series , that’s all we got … compile that with playing a boring style , missing out on elite talent . Atleast Toronto puts an entertaining product on the ice , has great skill players that are fun to watch . We hired Torts , Colorado hired Bednar , they stockpiled talent , we played competitive and topped out as a borderline playoff team . How’s it working out for Colorado ?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Amazing…..

What’s amazing? it’s a very generic quote that we’ve heard defected jackets players say about us too.

 

[Monstershockey]

Toronto may put an entertaining product on the ice, but they haven't gotten to the second round since 2003-04. If that's what you're looking for, then fine. The first few years Torts was here wasn't boring, and you know, sometimes things happen at the wrong time. This division got pretty tough the last few years. Reminds me kind of how the Cavs weren't good for a while, finally got some talent, and had to go through Michael Jordan every year in the playoffs. Doesn't mean they sucked, or Lenny Wilkens should have been fired, they just couldn't get past, arguably, the best player of his generation.

As far as Bednar goes, he didn't win the Calder Cup until after Torts was hired. There was no way they were going to dump Torts to bring in Bednar. They extended him for two years and he was set to coach here, then Roy quit, and everyone here knew he was gone to Colorado. Also, after his first year there, they were so bad people thought hiring Bednar was a mistake. How would that have played out had they canned him? I am pretty sure Torts offered him a position on his staff, but I don't think Bednar would have took anything less than a head coaching job.

It's going good there in Colorado, but some of the credit goes to their management for acquiring guys to fit what Bednar is doing. Had they changed direction, and started giving Bednar guys that didn't fit what he is doing, like what Columbus did, they could have a whole different outlook there, and Bednar may have done the same thing Torts did by asking out of his contract, or maybe even have been fired.

You brought up the Browns earlier and how players all want to go there, but yet they went hard at JJ Watt and he turned them down and went to Arizona, who wasn't as good as the Browns last year. Plus they had David Njoku wanting out last year. The difference was they told him no, and instead of whining and forcing the Browns' hand, he shut up and played, pretty good too. Even though their coach did very well last year, it's now a new year with higher expectations. If they don't stay healthy, and they start facing some adversity, it still could go sideways quick. Also, if they take a step back, I am sure the calls to get rid of some players or coaches will start up pretty quick. They were a lot worse for just as long as the Jackets weren't winning.

 

[BluejacketNut]

Winning, plain and simple.