Trending
What the Lions and Knicks Can Teach Us About Leadership
For years, the Detroit Lions and New York Knicks occupied a similar place in the American sports landscape. They were iconic brands with passionate fan bases, enormous resources, and enough history to fuel endless optimism, yet they consistently fell short of the expectations that surrounded them.
Every season began with hope. Every setback triggered another round of questions. Was it the coach? The roster? The strategy? The culture?
What few people recognize is that struggling organizations rarely suffer from a lack of talent alone. More often, they suffer from a leadership problem that sits much higher up the organizational chart.
The greatest leaders are not necessarily the ones with the strongest opinions or the deepest expertise in every corner of the business. They are the ones who possess the self-awareness to recognize where their expertise ends and the confidence to place critical decisions in the hands of people better equipped to make them.
That lesson sits at the heart of the remarkable turnarounds of both the Lions and the Knicks.
When Sheila Ford Hamp assumed control of the Lions in 2020, she inherited more than a struggling football team. She inherited decades of organizational baggage, a frustrated fan base, and a franchise that had become synonymous with underachievement.
Her first major move was not to hire a coach.
It was to change the decision-making structure.
She dismissed long-time general manager Bob Quinn and head coach Matt Patricia, then launched a comprehensive search for football leadership. Instead of looking for quick fixes, she focused on finding people whose vision aligned with the culture she wanted to build.
Brad Holmes arrived from the Los Angeles Rams with a reputation for talent evaluation. Dan Campbell brought an unconventional leadership style built around accountability, resilience, and belief.
Most importantly, Hamp resisted the temptation to interfere once they were in place.
She gave Holmes authority over football operations. She allowed Campbell to establish a culture that many outsiders initially mocked. When the Lions stumbled through difficult seasons and public pressure intensified, she stayed committed to the long-term vision rather than chasing short-term approval.
That patience is easy to celebrate in hindsight. It is extraordinarily difficult while living through it.
The Lions' turnaround was not the result of a single draft pick, a single speech, or a single season. It was the result of organizational alignment from ownership to the locker room.
A remarkably similar story unfolded in New York.
For years, the Knicks became a symbol of unrealized potential. Coaches changed. Executives changed. Strategies changed. Stability never arrived. The organization often appeared to be searching for answers while simultaneously changing direction before any plan had time to work.
The turning point came when James Dolan began creating distance between ownership and basketball decisions.
In 2020, he hired Leon Rose to run basketball operations and empowered him to reshape the organization. Rose assembled a leadership team, rebuilt the front office, invested heavily in player development, and created continuity where chaos had previously existed.
Tom Thibodeau was hired shortly thereafter and immediately established standards that had been absent for years. Accountability became non-negotiable. Defensive effort became part of the franchise identity. Expectations changed.
What followed was not a sudden breakthrough but a gradual transformation. The Knicks stopped acting like an organization searching for answers and started acting like one executing a plan.
When Mike Brown ultimately guided the team to a championship, he inherited more than a talented roster. He inherited an organization that finally knew who it was. The championship belongs to the players and coaches who delivered it, but it also belongs to the leaders who spent years building the environment that made it possible.
That distinction matters because it mirrors what happens inside successful businesses every day.
Many executives spend years climbing the ladder only to discover that the skills that helped them reach the top are not necessarily the skills required to stay there. A founder who excels at product development may struggle to lead a national sales organization. A CEO with a finance background may be tempted to overmanage marketing. A successful entrepreneur may assume that success in one area automatically qualifies them to direct every other function of the business.
It is an understandable mistake, but it is a costly one.
Organizations rarely reach their full potential when every major decision flows through a single individual. Growth eventually demands specialization. Complexity requires expertise. Sustainable success depends on leaders who are willing to surround themselves with people whose knowledge exceeds their own in specific disciplines.
The irony is that many of the strongest leaders appear less involved than their peers. They are not absent. They are not disengaged. They simply understand where they create the most value.
Their contribution is not making every decision. Their contribution is creating an environment where the right decisions can be made by the right people.
Their contribution is not making every decision. Their contribution is creating an environment where the right decisions can be made by the right people.
That requires humility, which remains one of the most misunderstood traits in leadership. Humility does not mean lacking confidence. It means possessing enough confidence to acknowledge that someone else may be better equipped to solve a particular problem. It means recognizing that leadership is not a test of personal intelligence but an exercise in collective excellence.
In both Detroit and New York, ownership made the same critical decision.
They stopped asking, "How do I fix this myself?"
And started asking, "Who is best equipped to fix this?"
The Lions did not become contenders because ownership mastered football strategy. The Knicks did not become champions because ownership mastered basketball operations.
Both organizations improved because their leaders embraced a truth that many executives spend their careers resisting:
The most successful leaders are not the ones who know everything.
They are the ones who know what they don't know.
Related: The AI Paradox: Why People Are Using Artificial Intelligence More—and Trusting It Less