Six Dolphins named to Joe Philbin's new 'leadership council.

I don't see how its a message. Jake wanted to leave. And if I recall, Dansby was asked to take a pay cut, so they still wanted him just not for the price. Seems like business more to me then a message.

 

Zach Thomas had major talent and a great work ethic. He also had none of what most people consider traditional or good eladership qualities. He sulked after losses (like Cam has been accused of doing); he often stated that he sucked and that the team played terrible.

And I never suggested talent was the only thing that mattered. Obviously you need a good work ethic and the desire to use that talent. I don't think Ray Lewis would have made Vernon Gholston play better.

Leadership in sports is way too nebulous a concept as to be useless, particularly since it is directly tied to the amount of winning. and the amount of winning is directly tied to the talent you have.

Let's take a current example. Is Johnny Manziel a good leader or not? If he's not does it even matter? He will unquestionably help TAMU win more games than they would without him.

 

I guess the word "obviously" struck me the wrong way, I don't believe you can make that assessment based on his comment about leadership..

No big deal, but that dude knows a lot about the game.

 

Ok. We'll just agree to disagree.

But let me ask one final question. Do you believe Ryan Tannehill and Dannell Ellerbee are good leaders? If leadership comes first, as you say, surely we should be able to tell right now whether we will have a winning or season or not, right?

And if we don't win, would that change your opinion of their leadership skills?

 

The first two were solid as long as they were on the field and/or healthy (Jake)... Dansby was fine but you got younger and more upside with Ellerbe. The contracts were eating up the salary for what they wanted to do. And your assessment leaves out the additional signings of Wheeler, Keller (was a solid signing aside from the freak injury), Clabo, Grimes with the cap space.

Gibson to Bess comparison is overblown. Wallace, Hartline, Gibson is better than Hartline, Bess, <Insert WR Here>. It's a passing league now with rules, rules, and more rules taking the defense out of the game... they viewed Wallace as the answer, not "Gibson for Bess".

Bottom line, it's WAY too early to say whether or not trading off veteran leadership for new blood was the right move... but what we were doing obviously wasn't the answer for the past decade so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

 

I can't really wrap my head around your upgrade v. downgrade list.

Martin may not be as talented as Long, but he doesn't suffer from chronic injuries and misplacement in the system. And through preseason, PFF has him better than Jake Long. Oh, and he doesn't cost a ridiculous amount of money despite numerous shortcomings.

I like Reggie Bush a lot... A lot. I wanted him resigned. But it's not as if we let Reggie walk and didn't have a high ceiling player behind him, ready to step up. Lamar Miller is likely a better fit for our system and has more use around the goal line. Reggie's leadership, big play ability, and receiving skills will be missed, but at the same time, we didn't lose LeSean McCoy or Jamal Charles.

Everyone is an upgrade over Bess. While I'm on the fence about Gibson in general, it's not hard to argue that Gibson is more useful than a guy with no 4th gear and an already suspect 3rd gear. Bess is productive but unspectacular.

Ellerbe is an upgrade over Dansby as far as I'm concerned. Dansby was a lot of hype.

 

Thank you Deej. I took no offense.

My opinion on this topic is much the same as my issues with your argument on the stadium/crowd noise. I just simply don't believe that intangibles make much of a difference at all in a field where the results can be measured in tangible ways on each snap.

Obviously I have great respect for you and your opinion as you know, much like I have respect for everybody else here. But when we can grade each player on each snap I find it hard to believe that a "rah rah" speech 30 minutes before the game would change any of those results in any meaningful way

 

No, it makes Joe Flacco or Ed Reed spend extra time working to get better.

 

You know what I know, I fully understand the coordinators reasoning for not gameplanning, but I also believe that football is football and the Intensity level is high enough in preseason to not just throw away what we saw in film..Coaches coach hard and players play hard..what I saw from Martin and what I saw from Long, in the preseason is encouraging.

 

Firstly, I never suggested Zach Thomas was a leader. I have been pretty vocal about the fact that he wasn't. Secondly, you're confusing being a leader with being a good player. No one is saying a good player has to be a good leader and vice versa, we are saying its important for a TEAM to have good leadership. That goes for a team in any sport, event, etc. There is no example of a great team without leadership because its simply nature that leaders emerge in any group.

And FTr, giving "rah-rah" speeches =/= leadership.

 

I have seen nothing on the field to suggest that they are. It is preseason however. I have often said I wish RT would bite some *** on some of these brain dead penalities. I really would like to see the guy get pissed off. It is OK to demand more on the football field. Behind the scenes, I have no idea either. Perhaps this is how they won the vote.

Don't confuse Johnny Footballs off-field issues with his on-field leadership. The two aren't the same. I have no idea if Manziel is a great leader on the field, or how much his teammates feel his will to excel and win but just because he is a problem child to his coaches and the NCAA does not terminate his ability to sell out for his teammates and in return solicit them selling out also.

I fully believe leadership and the concept of "team" matter in pro-sports. I have seen it. So in the end, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

and that's why we disagree, but I won't go there on that topic, and I'm trying not to bring it up as much, but I did start a thread on it in the NFL forum..

 

Does it?

Joe Flacco and Ed Reed strike me as guys who enjoy the game and enjoy working on their craft. i doubt either would be any less a player today if they had never met Ray Lewis.

 

I don't think its about the pre-game speech. I think leadership matters most in the pivotal moments during the game that will decide it. A great leader can make sure that each person remembers their responsibilities on key plays. A great leader can keep less experienced players in check during the most stressful parts of the game. Leadership matters most in the 4th quarter with 15 seconds left on the clock and you are trying to score or stop the other team.

 

Back to what you said here, why don't you think being inspired can make you elevate your game..you act as though everyone doesn't need motivation at this level and their all operating on the same system.?

 

This is why I'm very interested in how the Ravens do on D this year. The Murderer was nothing if not a stellar motivator.

 

The leaders of good teams are ususally the best players.

We love "intangibles" in sports becasue most people cannot identify with these spectacular athletes that they could never emulate no matter how hard they worked. We instead gravitate towards the hungry overachiever, who we believe we could be like given different circumstances.

The fact remains, good teams that start winning tend to have really good players. After the fact we then talk about how so and so was a great leader, etc. Similarly, when teams are bad, it is easy to say there is no leadership. I'm sure the Oakland Raiders will be accused of having no leadership this season. Ditto for the Jets. Yet the Jets main players are the same ones who went to an aFC Championship game 2 years ago. Did they forget how to be leaders? I doubt it. the answer is that the talent on the etam deteriorated. Rex Ryan is no longer the great player's coach elader, but is just a clown, etc.

 

There was a piece at Grantland a few days ago on Tracy McGrady that is needlessly long, but there were some interesting points. Tracy's lack of leadership his team's playoff exits was examined. How could a team with such a talented player fail to get deep into the playoffs?

Van Gundy suggests that it would have been possible to win if he were protected by other players, but it would be much worse for the team if your good players aren't pushing their peers, setting the example, managing conflicts, bridging the gap between players and coaches, etc.

None of the coaches interviewed suggested that Tracy's lack of leadership was some exaggerated quality, only that it could have been remedied by shielding him among other leaders. Leadership itself is regarded as crucial. Coaches can only do so much for a team.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9616069/the-unfortunate-tale-t-mac

 

Maybe I missed something coming in half way through the argument about inspiration and leadership.... but I never saw any of those guys on the previous "Leadership Committee" being overwhelming Hype Men haha Bush had a great attitude but it wasn't unprecedented leadership... at the end of the day it's Tannelhill's offense. With a side of Incognito playing bad cop. Dansby was such a great leader he was sticking up for a wife beater and running his mouth to the media about it.

 

Sure, they enjoy the game and working on their craft. That doesn't necessarily mean they would be willing to sacrifice their family life, personal life, health, etc. The more you're willing to sacrifice, the better.

 

As I said leaders emerge, that can take time.

Every team, good and bad has leaders. Some of the leaders are bad and some of them are good, and games/battles/contests/competition/etc. are often won, by something other than talent. Few teams have gone 0-16 just as few go 16-0 and that wouldn't be true if your theory was accurate.

If you've never been inspired by someone else to do better or be more than you thought capable, if even just for one game or one moment, then it would explain why you have this take ont hings.

 

[video=youtube;tdbCviZwmKc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdbCviZwmKc[/video]

 

People can be inspired to act, certainly. But typically that inspiration makes you consider doing something you did not do or had never done before. These guys have been playing football their whole lives and if they've made it to the NFL, most of the time they are talented enough and have the work ethic. To get to that NFL level is excruciatingly difficult.

So, no, I doubt that guys who have already put in the work to get to this level in the first place did anything differently after eharing a Ray Lewis speech than they would have before such speech. For example, I sincerely doubt that Ed Reed ever said to himself "Man I was just not going to bother trying hard today, but the Ray got me pumped"

It just doesn't work that way

 

You need both leadership and talent. Can't win without both.

 

Ed Reed absolutely would say "let me risk paralysis, because if I don't, Ray Lewis will think less of me". Half the people on this very forum will change who they are just to impress others.

 

I read the story and have great respect for Jeff Van Gundy, but the main point of Simmons' article was that McGrady played on bad teams that were failed by bad management, not bad leadership.

McGrady not being a leader made no difference during the 22 game winning streak, nor did it cause his etams to ever miss the playoffs. T-Mac's teams lost in the playoffs because he ahd poor teammates.

Let's take LeBron James. Now obviously I am biased inf avor of LBJ, but he was surrounded by poor teammates in Cleveland, lost a bunch of playoff series after their Finals appearance, sulked, tore his jersey off after his final Cleveland game, etc. He was accused of not being a leader, will never be Jordan/Kobe willing a team to win, etc.

Yet what happened the last two years? did LBJ suddenly rediscover his leadership abilities or was he simply surrounded by better players?

 

They are lucky to have Suggs, he is a dynamic personality, I think he is smart enough to know that hes gonna have to fill a tremendous void, but Ray was the best no question ...love their two replacements in Brown and Elam..Their culture there is 2nd to none, their stadium is 2nd best in terms of abilty to generate energy that can tangibly affect performance, point is, they won't be down for long.

 

I don't believe that for a second, but since we'll never be able to confirm it one way or another, we'll agree to disagree

 

You don't forget how to be a leader - You deem it worthless to try. While it is true talent breeds leadership, your still not as great as you could have been without it...

What if Ray Lewis said !$!$% it, I don't feel like playing today, or Adrian Peterson stopped trying to get those extra yards? Those kind of behaviors become infectious. Instead Ray Lewis sells out every play, demands sell out from others and Adrian Peterson puts his head down for those two extra yards....other guys give that little extra on their blocks.

It is a fickle entity but it is real. Perhaps it is more of an overall team concept but it rises in certain players and brings the best from everybody around them.

The Lake Placid Olympic Hockey Team...They believed in each other and achieved greatness, was that talent?? Or was that a group of guys giving it their all for each other and almost willing the impossible.

 

You might need both but we don't decide who the good leaders are until we see the results, which renders the whole exercise meaningless.

Take the Red Sox of last year. they literally needed to win one more game to make the playoffs. They had leads in several of their final few games that they blew with shoddy pitching. After the season, it came out predictably that they had no leadership. John Lackey and Josh Beckett were eating fried chicken during a game, etc. Yet had they won one more game, none of that would have mattered. Josh Beckett went from being the guy with the "guts of a burglar" according to Jack McKeon to a cancer based on the result of one game. It's ridiculous.

 

It was a great, fantastic moment in sports and US history. It was also a fluke. They had lost to Russia 10-0 in an exhibition a few weeks earlier and the Russian coach panicked early in the game and removed his star goalie. Obviously the guys played hard and wanted to win, but it was a fluke. That doesn't denigrate the accomplishment, they still went out there and did it. But all the eladership and desire in the world wouldn't have mattered if they had played Russia 9 more times. They probably would have lost all 9 times, which I believe Eruzzione and others have stated over the years.

 

Two signed free agent deals and the third was cut. Makes plenty of sense.

 

I'm not sure how our opinions and determinations are relevant to the point? The point of leadership isn't to gain recognition as a leader from fans.

 

Here is my ultimate point. You probably cannot get to the NFL in the first place if you don't already have most of the qualities you ascribe to Lewis and AP.

 

There are dozens upon dozens of players that lack these qualities. Not everyone on your roster needs to be a leader. What you do need is leadership on your roster.

 

Unfortunately, under your theory, talent should win everytime.

 

That is not true.

Many players bust out and all of them were talented enough to get drafted or signed.

 

I would expect atleast 5 of the 6 to be same next year....could be all 6.

 

I don't want to turn this into a basketball debate or really debate the piece. But saying that "leadership doesn't explain x,y and z. Therefore it is insignificant," really misses the point. It is not the #1 reason McGrady failed to win a title or go deep in the playoffs. Yes, you need talent. Nobody is suggesting that a team of quadriplegics are going to win because they have leadership qualities. But leadership is regarded as one of the crucial ingredients by Van Gundy. It can't be your coach and it shouldn't be your lesser players. To me, just because something can't be tracked metrically doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

Oh please. The only reason Roberto Wallace put on a uniform was his height, weight and speed