Dolphins chase a new identity by emulating the Packers’ build philosophy

The Miami Dolphins’ identity question for the 2026 season is no longer just about style of play, it is about organizational design. According to coverage from Yahoo Sports’ Splash Zone on July 15, the Dolphins have undergone what is described as a complete front-office overhaul, with the reset process beginning during the season and culminating in major leadership changes after the 2025 campaign ended.

The personnel timeline matters because it frames what the organization is trying to install. The same report notes that general manager Chris Grier was fired at the end of October, and that head coach Mike McDaniel was relieved after the 2025 season concluded. In other words, the Dolphins’ “this is who we are” conversation has been running in parallel with a leadership transition, not only as an offseason talking point.

The organizational shift is now anchored by two hires with a shared professional history. The Dolphins, per the report, hired Jon-Eric Sullivan as general manager and Jeff Hafley as head coach. Both previously worked together in Green Bay, and the Dolphins are said to be hoping to adopt a Packers-like approach, suggesting a preference for a coherent internal method rather than a patchwork of schemes or decision-making styles.

For teams, an “identity” can be slippery because it often sounds like football aesthetics. But organizations that intentionally model themselves after another club usually point to process: how the roster is constructed, how staff roles are defined, how communication moves from the draft to the practice field, and how development is measured. The Dolphins’ message through this leadership model is that the identity will be created through repeatable choices across the football operations department, not through one offseason of improvisation.

Green Bay’s influence is also being treated as more than a networking coincidence. The Splash Zone coverage frames the Dolphins’ goal as learning how that organization operated when it had stability in its core decision-makers and how it translated that stability into roster-building. For Miami, that implies that the “identity” they want to present in 2026 is tied to continuity at the top: one general manager and one head coach expected to move in the same direction, using the same internal playbook for what talent profiles they prioritize and how they coach them.

Still, the practical test will arrive on Sundays, because even the clearest blueprint must survive injuries, matchup problems, and the inevitable unevenness of player development. The Dolphins’ leadership transition can set expectations and enforce decision-making consistency, but it cannot eliminate the variance that comes with learning a new staff’s football language and accountability standards.

What to watch next is not only how the Dolphins look in preseason and the early portion of the regular season, but whether their roster decisions and coaching structure feel aligned. If Sullivan and Hafley’s Green Bay connection is meant to produce a repeatable method, then the team should show signs of coherent planning across roster construction, offensive and defensive play-calling tendencies, and how quickly players are integrated into their roles.

From a league perspective, the Dolphins’ approach also speaks to how quickly NFL teams are willing to reset their identity when results and structure do not match expectations. The organization appears to be betting that replacing the decision-makers who run the process will bring clarity, and that clarity will turn into performance. In the AFC, where margins are thin, the Dolphins will need that performance to arrive faster than a typical reboot, because the “identity” narrative can only carry so long without it translating into wins.