Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chemistry vs Talent

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chemistry vs Talent

    http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-networ...stry-vs-talent

    I think this is a quite interesting discussion.

    I think id take talent over chemistry. Obviously chemistry is important, but Talent is the thing that u absolutly need to win.


    but you need both to eventually win. I feel like its easier to get a talented team to get a better chemistry than get a team with great chemistry to get more talented if thats even possible
    Last edited by Gay Ork Wang; 05-12-2009, 05:27 PM.


  • #2
    "An Army is a team; lives, sleeps, eats, fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is a lot of crap."

    -General Patton

    Sure the cowboys get talked about alot, and yeah they have a ton of talent, but the chemistry has been lacking.

    I think talent can get you through the regular season, but a team's chemistry shines through in the playoffs.



    Sig thanks to Bonekrusher

    Comment


    • #3
      If its a cut and dry issue then talent wins out because if you don't have talent you can't win. But in the NFL everyone has talent, everyone has ability. If I had to choose between a lot of talent and a average chemistry or a average talent and a lot of chemistry then I would side with the chemistry. A good example would be the Oakland Raiders. Nnamdi Asomoghua, Chris Johnson, Zach Miller, Darren McFadden, JaMarcus Russell, Thomas Howard etc. They have a lot of extremely talented players but lack the chemistry throughout the whole organisation to be successful. On the flipside the Miami Dolphins last year had not a lot of outstanding players(Joey Porter, Jake Long are the only definites, maybe Ronnie Brown) but yet won 11 games last year, won the division and got to the playoffs because they worked hard and had the team chemistry. The Dallas Cowboys have arguably the most talented team in the NFL and havent won a playoff game this decade. The San Diego Chargers are the only team that can compete with the Cowboys talentwise and they havent been to a Superbowl. The New England Patriots won Superbowls with a bunch of scrubs but a core of talented players and good chemistry. The same with the Colts, outside of Manning, Harrison, Wayne, Freeney, Sanders and Saturday they were average to good players but had the right chemistry to win.


      BoneKrusher killing it with the sig

      Comment


      • #4
        Decent talent with great chemistry wins, when faced with talent that is only so much better. A few breaks that go your way dont hurt either.

        Pick the Winners Champion 2008 | 2011

        Comment


        • #5
          A good audio visual department like the patriots had from 1999-2006.
          my scent?...like making love to a lumberjack
          <TACKLE> i will ngata give you a bj raji
          <+BOE> Scott, with Burfict's character concerns (whether legit or not) you think Pioli would draft him. :D
          <+ScottWright> Why not. Baldwin does need a sparring partner...
          Originally posted by Hermstheman83
          What's with the hate on Ricky Stanzi? Those youtube clips of him with the hulk hogan theme music instantly make him better than Luck.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by bored of education View Post
            A good audio visual department like the patriots had from 1999-2006.
            i love you boe

            Comment


            • #7
              Every team has a good amount of talent, obviously some have more than others, but that doesn't mean everything.

              Talent is nice, but without chemistry it can never reach the full potential. The human aspect of the game is often overlooked, the league isn't like Madden where you can trade and sign any player and they fit in perfectly. You need to have the camaraderie present in order to win championships, guys who will play of each other and not just themselves.

              When has a team with a crappy locker room environment won a lot?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bored of education View Post
                A good audio visual department like the patriots had from 1999-2006.
                That's how they developed good chemistry. The all sat in on Saturday nights together eating popcorn watchng signals. Great times where had by all


                BoneKrusher killing it with the sig

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by AntoinCD View Post
                  That's how they developed good chemistry. The all sat in on Saturday nights together eating popcorn watchng signals. Great times where had by all
                  while Bill was out didling Little Leaguers from the surrounding towns.
                  my scent?...like making love to a lumberjack
                  <TACKLE> i will ngata give you a bj raji
                  <+BOE> Scott, with Burfict's character concerns (whether legit or not) you think Pioli would draft him. :D
                  <+ScottWright> Why not. Baldwin does need a sparring partner...
                  Originally posted by Hermstheman83
                  What's with the hate on Ricky Stanzi? Those youtube clips of him with the hulk hogan theme music instantly make him better than Luck.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    So i guess a better question would be:

                    Would u rather take a team with a lot of talent but almost no chemistry at all.
                    or would u take a team with a lot of chemistry but hardly any talent

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In the end, I think running your offense/defense with the right players is the smoothest path to the Super Bowl. The perfect example is Bill Belicheck who constantly brings in role players to contribute to the offensive and defensive scheme that he runs in Foxboro.

                      Talent is when you look at teams like Dallas, San Diego...who don't always hav

                      BoneKruser with the DOPE sig

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        you need both, but I think a talented team with little chemistry would win less games than a less talented team with great chemistry. It's a team game.

                        Unrelated sport, but related subject: why do you figure Chelsea hasn't won the Champions League yet? Mainly because they're not a team but an eleven man collection of talent.

                        Sig by Fenikz

                        I remember NFLDC
                        don't tell anyone, but Charlie Casserly is a dope fiend

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          You need a combination of both to win. See the Dallas cowboys. All the talent in the world but no chemistry. As a giants fan, we had the same issue. We had guys like Strahan, Toomer, Tiki, Plax, and Shockey. Plax and Shockey never spend the offseason workouts with the team. I think now is the true first year, all those personalities are gone, and no one is in Miami working out by alone. But you need a combination of both to win.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            i think id rather take a team with a lot of talent and try to get a chemistry going than way around

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gay Ork Wang View Post
                              i think id rather take a team with a lot of talent and try to get a chemistry going than way around
                              You can't just get chemistry going. That comes in the talent you get. Talent and personality is together. That's just being a human, having football talent, and a set personality. The set goal is to find good guys who have talent. That's why some front offices grade players based on talent, and then on their off the field personality too. Theory being, you collect guys like that chemistry will automatically come because all the guys are of the near same personality type, and will be a good fit.

                              But if you just focus on talent, without regard for personality, then developing chemistry will be really hard. You would need a Bill B, Coughlin, or Parcells type coach who players would fear, yet respect. You would need a coach who can lay down the law to try to foster it. But even then you can get stuck with a Shockey or Tiki Barber type guy. You just gotta get the right personality from the get go.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information