Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ONE-TIME. Show ONE-TIME's posts

    Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    First off I dont want to pretend like the two are mutually exclusive , you can have both. But there has been alot of debate in the media , amongst friends/family , TV/radio , heads of state , and on here as well. I would always rather have talent than leadership. I firmly believe that winning breeds leadership and you can teach , learn leadership qualities. I cant teach talent , you can absolutely make someone better. For example , theres many people that are born w/ physical gifts , Ill use jumping as an example. There are people that have , start out w/ a 35 inch vert. jump , but you have work , lift , jump train , to get a higher. Sure you have to work at it , but your BORN w/ the original 35 inch , see my point? Your BORN w/ the gift of a 35 inch vert. If you cant get off the ground to begin w/ , theres no amount of lifting , jump training that will give you a 40 inch vert. But you can live , experience things that shape you into a leader or someone who has leadership attributes. Brady wasnt the leader we see today in 01' , fortunately we had guys like Brown , Bruschi , Buckley , Cox , Phifer , Pleasant , and Otis " my man " Smith. I mean is there any debate that guys like this helped Brady become the leader he is today. Listen I love the idea of having leaders like Harrison and Bruschi , but they wouldnt even be on the team , much less the field if they didnt have tremendous talent. Trust me I see everyones point that would lean or strongly prefer to have leadership over talent. Fact is , talent wins you games , and no-one is listening to a " leader " that sits on the bench because he's not talented enough to get in the game. All opinions , thoughts , criticism is welcomed.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Leadership builds on itself but talent can build ego's and in the nfl that can be a bad thing. I think you need a healthy mix of both in all reality however I firmly believe in the saying that one rotten apple can ruin the bunch. If I had to choice between high character leadership guys or malcontent talents I'd take the leadership in a heartbeat. Thankfully there are players who have both. The key to me is filling the team with as many high character high talent guys and placing them with talented leaders rather then forgoing character and leadership and just grabbing as much talent as possible
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    In Response to Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?:
    [QUOTE]First off I dont want to pretend like the two are mutually exclusive , you can have both. But there has been alot of debate in the media , amongst friends/family , TV/radio , heads of state , and on here as well. I would always rather have talent than leadership. I firmly believe that winning breeds leadership and you can teach , learn leadership qualities. I cant teach talent , you can absolutely make someone better. For example , theres many people that are born w/ physical gifts , Ill use jumping as an example. There are people that have , start out w/ a 35 inch vert. jump , but you have work , lift , jump train , to get a higher. Sure you have to work at it , but your BORN w/ the original 35 inch , see my point? Your BORN w/ the gift of a 35 inch vert. If you cant get off the ground to begin w/ , theres no amount of lifting , jump training that will give you a 40 inch vert. But you can live , experience things that shape you into a leader or someone who has leadership attributes. Brady wasnt the leader we see today in 01' , fortunately we had guys like Brown , Bruschi , Buckley , Cox , Phifer , Pleasant , and Otis " my man " Smith. I mean is there any debate that guys like this helped Brady become the leader he is today. Listen I love the idea of having leaders like Harrison and Bruschi , but they wouldnt even be on the team , much less the field if they didnt have tremendous talent. Trust me I see everyones point that would lean or strongly prefer to have leadership over talent. Fact is , talent wins you games , and no-one is listening to a " leader " that sits on the bench because he's not talented enough to get in the game. All opinions , thoughts , criticism is welcomed.
    Posted by ONE-TIME[/QUOTE]

    Worked well last year.....leadership is part of someone's personality...NOMAH could not do it for the sox when he was asked to step up...

    How did the leadership turn out last year?  It sort of failed.....time to bring in the leaders....
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    I want a talented leader.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from kebbe. Show kebbe's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

             SHEAR PHYSICAL TALENT FAILS WHEN THERE IS A LEADERSHIP VOID AND THE BEST LEADERS CAN ONLY GET MAXIMUM EFFORT FROM THE PLAYERS AND IF THE TALENT AVAILABLE,EVEN WHEN MAXIMUM EFFORT IS ACHIEVED,IS LACKING THE TEAM FAILS.IT REQUIRES BOTH TO BE A CHAMPION.THOUGH I WILL SAY IF THE TALENT LEVEL IS RELATIVELY CLOSE TO THOSE TEAMS WITH SLIGHTLY BETTER TALENT THEN LEADERSHIP(AND COACHING PROWESS)CAN REACH FOR A TITLE WITH 100% EFFORT IS CONSISTENTLY REACHED.IN A NUTSHELL,IT TAKES BOTH TO BE A CHAMPION.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ONE-TIME. Show ONE-TIME's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    I want to make it clear that I , as Im sure everyone would , would prefer both. I actually f!cked up my own thread , what a idiot I am LMFAO! I should have asked what do you think we need more on this team , leadership/talent? Thats the question I wanted to ask , answer is still the same for me though , talent. I think we have enough leaders in the locker room already , 12 , 75 , BB , 33 , Im liking what Im seeing from 51 in that department. So I think we're good in that area , I really believe that our problem last year was talent. Teams were dead set on not letting Moss beat them , 12 hits him early on a few more time times and Moss ends up w/ 1400/16-17Td's. Plus and this cant be overstated , he was playing w/ a seperated shoulder for 3/4ths of the year. For the life of me I cant understand all the critisism he received last year. If thats anyone else their going down as a boston hero , but people never liked Randy and have been waiting to tear him apart since he came here. That said , teams doubled him early/often and as I said before , as good as WW is/was he just doesnt get in the end zone. You cant depend on a guy that much who doesnt put up 6 , it works against you ,  especially when you get into the red zone. I mean if you think about it hes really been our only scoring threat since he came here. In 07' we had multiple weapons , Gaff had a couple big ones , Stallworth had a few , I think Wlker had 4 , combine that w/ Faulk/Maroney/Watson and theres our O. Two years ago and last year we've really on depended on 81 to put up 6 for us. By the numbers we were a top ten rushing team last year , but watching us we looked like a mid-twenties team. I judge a team on how good they are at rushing by a couple things , can you run when you want and need to , big difference between them both. Can you run in Pittsburgh and can you run in Seattle? Those are 2 of the 4 things I would look for. Everybody knows this is a passing league and probablly will be for some time , but you have to run the ball throughout the season to be successful. And the Pats need two guys they can depend on. If we dont trade up or down and stay put w/ our picks one guy I really like is Best from Cal. I really think hes the best RB in the draft and IMO would be a steal at 44/47. Id love to grab him and trade Maroney to Japan. I really like the sound of a Best/Taylor backfield w/ a lil' Morris mixed in. My point is and there is one lol , is that we need talent more than leadership and we have enough leadership on this team already. We were predictable , stagnant , and one dimensional at times , we knew it and our opponents knew it. Both on O and on D , IMO we really need the help of some playmakers/game changers on this team. Thats why Im all for trading up to the ten spot , give them our first , 44th , 119th(4th) and next years 4th rounder. A guy like McClain , Haden , Morgan , Paul , Thomas , maybe even Berry would do wonders for this team. I think Paul would be better than Morgan playing OLB simply because he is more athletic and versatile. Also Morgan played a little OLB in college and didnt look good at all. I also love my CB/S's , and absolutely love both Haden and Earl Thomas. I think Thomas is a s good as Berry and even a little better when it comes to tackling/wrapping up and playing the run , just a little bit. You cant put a price on what a Reed , Polamalu , Dawkins , Lynch etc can do for your club. The Pats like to use their S's interchangeably so I like a Thomas/Berry , Meriweather secondary. Or put a Haden opposite Bodden and have two very good , potential great CB's. IMO Haden is as safe a pick as there is in this years draft. McClain is another cant miss guy , we need another ILB as bad as any position on D. Why not have two potential great ones in Mayo/McClain?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ONE-TIME. Show ONE-TIME's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Hey I want both , talent and leadership , believe me! And Im not talking having a talented guy , w/ Ryan Leaf and Lawerence Phillips character. I just think that talent was more of a problem than leadership. Seriously think about it , BB and 12 have all the leadership we need. And trust me I hate saying stuff like " we got 12 and BB , what can go wrong ". I think people that say believe that shouldnt be allowed out of their house. But those two really set the tone , along w/ Fork on D. IMO we need guys to make plays when needed. Moss is favorite player since I saw him tear up Ball St. for 5 TD's , but he is getting old , along w/ faulk etc. I really think we need some play makers. Maybe a Jackson from SD , I dont believe they can hold on to all those guys for much longer. I wouldnt put him in the top ten , but hes pretty close and is a proven 1000/7-10 TD guy who along side 81 could only get better.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from RealtyPats. Show RealtyPats's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    football is more of a team sport than any other.  What u need is guys that buy into the system and attitude that the team wants.  The reason the Pats were so successful is because they had above average talent, football intelligence AND all or almost all 53 players bought into the Pats way ( also having an excellent coach and QB helped).  Sd had some really talented teams that couldn't play together, Cinncy had a talented team a few yrs ago and imploded because they were a bunch of individuals. 

    If compared to a chick.

    Talent is looks, need to get in the door, maybe a few dates.

    Leadership/attitude is what you look for long term.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Now the big question is that there are 3 types of talent, talent with leadership abilities (IE Brady, Wilfork, Mayo), just plan talented (IE Moss 'note since coming to NE most of his nonsense hasn't been a factor until this past season when the locker room leadership seemed to disappear', Welker, Warren, Bodden), and talent with issues (IE Marshall, Holmes, Lynch, T.O. 'even though T.O. isn't like the others listed he still is a clubhouse cancer'), which one are we talking here?

    If it's the middle where they are just plain talented or might have minor issues that the leadership can keep in check then I'd rather have talent but if we are talking the latter with guys that have major issues or have been known to be major clubhouse cancers I'd rather have the leadership
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Realty - very well put. It's the teams with above average talent and 53 leaders that lead us to the SB years while teams littered with talent and no leadership that made fast exits, such as SD, Was, Cin, Boys, even Denver had a numbers of years with tons of talent but McDaniels has been cleaning house lately. One great example recently is the Rooneys. If it was all about talent they wouldn't have traded Holmes for nothing and wouldn't be trying to trade Ben right now. Leadership and character does have to play a factor
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ONE-TIME. Show ONE-TIME's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    You know what , Ive been saying the samething Reality for years. Buying into a system 100% and laying your body on the line for the next to you cant be overstated! One team I see that in is the jets. Revis is a very good player , but Ive been saying all year hes where hes at because of the " TEAM D " they play. Every guy has a role , buys into it , and plays it hard. Plus they seem to have done a great job putting that right guys in position to win , but before that , they find the right guys to play the position. Guys like Pace , Jenkins , Harris , Ellis , now Leonard and Scott. I really believe those guys when the talk up their coach and other players. You show the same thing when he was in Balt. Players knew the D was winning games and they looked up to Ryan as the man w/ the plan. Great point Reality!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    To ALL:

    First, you're correct one-time: One CANNOT always have the best of both the Talent & Leadership Worlds.  So, IF I'm running a team, In the First Round I'm targeting a Player with excellent talent, a guy who has very good talent, Yet one who shows the very best & utmost Leadership abilities.  Again, One cannot ALWAYS have BOTH...But In Rd 1 of an NFL Draft, ya can come pretty darn close.  So IN that First Round, IF I have the choice between an excellent talent who is simply unreal with certain added intangibles, such as desire, passion to play, selflessness, & team-character, OR Drafting some supreme "god-send" talented player who's the better talent than this other guy I've just mentioned, BUT that this "god-send" better talent comes with character concerns...Imo, I'm taking the FIRST guy I mentioned.  It's that very-good to excellent talented player whom I can build my team around.  THIS guy, Is good enough in his play, to be that Core-Leader, AND is the guy whom people respect enough to rally around. 

    Now AFTER I get my excellent (but NOT "god-sent" talent) in Round 1, Then In Rounds 2-7, IF a guy isn't simply a laden with awful massive personality shortcoming(s), and who'll be an utter team plague, 99% of the time...Gimme the guy that's the better talent in each and every of these subsequent rounds.  I'm so god-awful sick of Belichick doing multi-round reaches for far, far lesser talents, NOT simply because a higher skilled player shows some bad personality shortcoming, BUT because that multi-round MUCH lesser-skilled player, IS & HAS simply UNreal intangibles...  One DOESN'T need 37 supreme "Team-Guys", 37 guys with these fantastic leadership, and other INtangible qualities...  One NEEDS 6, but NO more..."True" Player Leaders, AND then Talented Players, who may not have simply unbelievable Intangibles, BUT who have enough Physical Talent & just good enough INtangibles, so as NOT to be some trully cancerous cell for your NFL Club.  Belichick has tried it this other way:  Very much shortchanging Talent OVER Intangibles in very many POST Round 1 Selections within the past at least 5 Drafts, targeting lesser quality in play simply because a draftee with far less skill has some unreal intangible.  I've stated before, One HAS to be able to "Walk the Walk" of skill, to be able then to "Talk the Talk" of being 1 of these select handful of core guys you need to get other players to center around... 

    So dear god, AFTER you've targeted your CORE Very Good Talents & Excellent Leaders, WhyTH draft some lesser-skilled player who has some great INtangibles, OVER some greater skilled player, but one whom doesn't show as phenomenal an Intanggible quality as the much lesser talented player?  I want a Skilled Leader @ QB, 1 skilled leader on the O-Line & D-Line, 1 skilled Leader @ LB & Secondary, AND ideally 1 more skilled leader @ any one single of WR, TE, OR RB positions (just 1 of 3 of these spots).  That Makes a Grand Total of 6 Players who are BOTH Very Good Physical Talents AND Excellent with those Intangibles (esp. Leadership and Passion)...In NO way is that some fictional pipe-dream for a team to be able to get.  AFTERWARDS, Gimme as many NON-Cancerous players who are better talents than that s#cky playing but wonderful "Leader" whom I'll pass on...  
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Laz,

    I've heard you bring this idea up several times and in general I would agree that reaching for players is bad business but here's the problem I have. 

    How do you assess who is a reach?  Kiper thought Vollmer was a fifth round guy, but is that where NFL teams rated him?  We don't know, media draft "experts" don't work for NFL teams and we don't know where the other 31 teams rate a player.  BB thought he had 2nd round talent, and he probably figured other teams also had similiar observations.  I'm just using Vollmer as an example but the same goes for any player, to adopt a strategy of going after guys that have fallen past the media's predicted spot is just supplanting the media's scouting department for your own.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    The coach's job is leadership.  In players, I like talent.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    In Response to Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?:
    First off I dont want to pretend like the two are mutually exclusive , you can have both. But there has been alot of debate in the media , amongst friends/family , TV/radio , heads of state , and on here as well. I would always rather have talent than leadership. I firmly believe that winning breeds leadership and you can teach , learn leadership qualities. I cant teach talent , you can absolutely make someone better. For example , theres many people that are born w/ physical gifts , Ill use jumping as an example. There are people that have , start out w/ a 35 inch vert. jump , but you have work , lift , jump train , to get a higher. Sure you have to work at it , but your BORN w/ the original 35 inch , see my point? Your BORN w/ the gift of a 35 inch vert. If you cant get off the ground to begin w/ , theres no amount of lifting , jump training that will give you a 40 inch vert. But you can live , experience things that shape you into a leader or someone who has leadership attributes. Brady wasnt the leader we see today in 01' , fortunately we had guys like Brown , Bruschi , Buckley , Cox , Phifer , Pleasant , and Otis " my man " Smith. I mean is there any debate that guys like this helped Brady become the leader he is today. Listen I love the idea of having leaders like Harrison and Bruschi , but they wouldnt even be on the team , much less the field if they didnt have tremendous talent. Trust me I see everyones point that would lean or strongly prefer to have leadership over talent. Fact is , talent wins you games , and no-one is listening to a " leader " that sits on the bench because he's not talented enough to get in the game. All opinions , thoughts , criticism is welcomed.
    Posted by ONE-TIME

    I sort of think your asking the wrong question, I don't think teams look at players like that. Any player that has talent and makes plays will essentially be a leader whether they want to or not. 

    Just like in any sport you played or in your job you looked at those who were successful to see what to do.  Younger players are going to watch Brandon Marshall and see how he trains, see his attitude toward the coach and how he is around players and ask him about how to do this or that.  He can lead them into good habits or bad habits.  Nobody is going to follow someone who doesn't make plays, so the question is are your team leaders showing the young players how to be professionals or something else.  Teams probably don't look at players like Marshall as having a talent so unique it can't be found elsewhere, they see a guy whose leadership can sometimes be detrimental to the team.  So is someone like Troy Brown a better player because he can make plays and lead players to good habits, I think so.  But then if you bring in someone like Marshall to the Pats who will the players emulate- Welker or Marshall.  The most talented players can be the most cancerous because people follow them.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MarcW1. Show MarcW1's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Manning or Leaf? 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    90% of the players need to be followers - follow orders, do what you're told, work your hardest, obey the coaches and the quarterback and the lead safety and middle linebacker ... show up on time, don't whine to the press, don't act like Brandon Merriweather, etc.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    What we need more of huh?  Well, obviously we need both.  We need talent without an ego.  AKA playmakers.  Then we need leaders to make sure the playmakers stay with the program, so some of each is nice. 
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffectredux. Show mosseffectredux's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    In Response to Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?:
    In Response to Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have? : Worked well last year.....leadership is part of someone's personality...NOMAH could not do it for the sox when he was asked to step up... How did the leadership turn out last year?  It sort of failed.....time to bring in the leaders....
    Posted by m1021us
    god i hate to say this but i agree with you for a change.good leadership is needed,but what veterans are available to do so?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from jjaycee. Show jjaycee's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    It is interesting that the subject of leadership has been raised, and gotten so much interest. As a fan of the Patriots, it is my humble opinion that is a quality that is lacking on the team, specifically, on the defense. There is no doubt that
    ability is lacking as well, no pass rush, the lack of sacks other than BTK, and poor coverage by the secondary. But leadership is not a physical attribute. It can't be
    learned, it is just there in certain players that they portray, and can communicate
    in a way to their teammates around them,  that helps them to play at a higher, more effecient level. The point, and hopefully the coaches feel the same way, and will do something about that when they decide who to draft this coming week- that they will be making leadership a priority quality they will be looking for, in those selections. I hope so---- oh, and talent just as much.     
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    why does it have to be one or the other?

    Can't we have both? :)
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ONE-TIME. Show ONE-TIME's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    Well...Bubba , if you read my first post you would see that I said the two arn't necessarily mutualy exclusive. This team obviously has needs in both areas , what do you think we need more? Thats the question I was trying to ask more or less. IMHO we have enough leaders in BB , 12 , 75 , 33 , 51 , Id even add 29/70/67 to the list. I played sports all my life , HS/College , and continue to do so. I grew up playing hockey , but quickly found out that my love was for basketball and still is. It aso didnt hurt that Im 6-4 and was 6-1 as a freshman in HS. Sports can teach you so much , thats one of the things I love about it. One of the things you learn and accept throughout the way is that there can only be so many leaders in the locker room. Sometimes being a follower isnt a bad thing , followers go out there and get the job done. The execute the game plan , carry out the orders , and help set the tone that the leader preaches. I cant think of who , but someone else made the same point , more or less. I share the same sentiment and think you made an excellent point. Im sorry I cant remember your screen name , like I said I share the same thought pertaining to the amount of leaders in one locker room. But you said it first...and better might I add.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffectredux. Show mosseffectredux's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    In Response to Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?:
    why does it have to be one or the other? Can't we have both? :)
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii
    it is great to have both.teams need both.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?

    In Response to Re: Talent or Leadership? Which would you rather have?:
    Well...Bubba , if you read my first post you would see that I said the two arn't necessarily mutualy exclusive. This team obviously has needs in both areas , what do you think we need more? Thats the question I was trying to ask more or less. IMHO we have enough leaders in BB , 12 , 75 , 33 , 51 , Id even add 29/70/67 to the list. I played sports all my life , HS/College , and continue to do so. I grew up playing hockey , but quickly found out that my love was for basketball and still is. It aso didnt hurt that Im 6-4 and was 6-1 as a freshman in HS. Sports can teach you so much , thats one of the things I love about it. One of the things you learn and accept throughout the way is that there can only be so many leaders in the locker room. Sometimes being a follower isnt a bad thing , followers go out there and get the job done. The execute the game plan , carry out the orders , and help set the tone that the leader preaches. I cant think of who , but someone else made the same point , more or less. I share the same sentiment and think you made an excellent point. Im sorry I cant remember your screen name , like I said I share the same thought pertaining to the amount of leaders in one locker room. But you said it first...and better might I add.
    Posted by ONE-TIME


    Well, as of today - I think the Patriots need both. Even though players like Wilfork and Mayo - recently said something similar to "We're going to be more vocal this coming season" - it remains whether the "new regime" will be able to keep everyones toes on the line.

    The Patriots are also missing talent - otherwise, many of us wouldn't have had much to talk about this off-season.  People's opinions regarding our areas of weakness have been expressed repeatedly....

    It's still early to see if the Patriots have collected enough players with both qualities to get back to being a "first tier" team.  People get mad at me when I say that they're at the top of the "second tier"....lol.
     

Share