Yep and I agree with you that intangibles are no substitute for talent.
At the same time, someone like Jeff George was clearly very talented but never won in part because he didn't many intangibles (wasn't a leader, was a jerk, openly fought with coaches, etc etc etc). He was still talented enough to play in the NFL for 14 years, throwing for 27,602 yards and 154 career TDs.
Ryan Leaf kinda reminded me of George, except he had serious behavioral issues that ultimately manifested via his pill addiction and criminal behavior.
All of those guys were very good college players but lacked the intangibles to succeed at the next level (things like leadership, work ethic, absolute will to win etc etc etc).
QBs like Russell Wilson and Joe Montana don't / didn't have ideal height and weight but they have those innate intangibles that has them not only making plays but also winning the Super Bowl.
Would love to see a comparison to the 2000 team. Big difference is the QB and OL was better back then.
I'm not sure the QB was that much better. Tui was certainly a better runner. Quite HonestlyI think the difference was coaching, coaching, coaching.
Tui had innate leadership which Price did not and I don't think Tui's leadership was because of coaching. He had that independently and the coaching enhanced it. Price was a better passer but Tui raised the level of play for everyone around him.
I'm not a strong believer in the QB intangibles thing. I will concede that Tui was better at making big plays when the team needed them though.
No. Those guys fucking sucked.
I believe in quarterbacks that actually make good plays, not "talented" gun slingers who suck.
I disagree with Boobie about QB intangibles, but Montana and Russell Wilson produce and win. Same with Drew Bree's for the most part. Leaf, George, Russell, Locker, etc have talent, but they all suck.
CHRIST
Jeff George had a big arm. That alone doesn't make a quarterback talented.
Comments
Jeff George had a big arm. That alone doesn't make a quarterback talented.