FB: Empire 8

[JQV]

Well if "not once" has attitude and desire won over talent, then talent always wins over attitude and desire.

I know it's not "exactly" saying the talented team wins 100% of the time, but I believe that's what your inital implication was.  

It's not even related.

Just because things unrelated to "attitude and desire" like strategy, execution (ie making less mistakes than an opponent), may occassionally beat talent doesn't mean that "attitude" or "desire" have anything to do with anything.

[sjfcards]

I think another team of Cardinals kind of proved that Attitude and Desire can win over talent.  You can't tell me that the Arizona Cardinals have more talent than the Eagles.  The Cardinals got to the Super Bowl and Played so well more on Attitude and Desire than their overall talent.

I can't?  They had a former NFL MVP QB having a career year.  Two of the top 5 receivers in the NFL.  Two of the top 20 RBs in the NFL.  Three first round picks in the secondary.  Two first round picks on the DL.  

Philly had the ghost of Donovan McNabb, a dinged up Westbrook that hasn't been Westbrook in years, two fast but otherwise unremarkable receivers, and an aging defense that had lost a step.

Just because Arizona was a joke for a decade doesn't mean they didn't have the most talent.

OK, then explain the 1980 U.S Olympic Hockey team. 

While the 1980 Olympic hockey team is a great example of a less talented team winning basically on guts and attitude, I think it makes the point that the more talented team usually wins. Most who know about that game would tell you that if those two teams played 100 times, the Russians (actualy the USSR's) would win 99 of them. Also, the fact that the US team won even tho they were the so overpowered talent wise,  is the reason that we are talking about the game almost 30 years later on a message board about Football.
Of course, attitude, enthusiasm, and excitement count for a lot in college football. That is why you see players jump up and down and pounding their chest when they stop a RB for a 4 yard gain in the middle of the first quarter on TV. But, more often than not, the team with the horses wins the race.

[pg04]

Yeah, more often than not.  Not ALWAYS.   

[sjfcards]

One more quick point on the talent/attitude discussion, I think the trump card for talent, more than enthusiasm is quality coaching. There are countless examples where a good scheme, and a plan of attack (which may include making a team believe they are better than they are, and giving the rousing speach to get the team enthused) can push a less talented team over the top.

[JQV]

"attitude, enthusiasm, heart, guts, etc."  are cliches coaches rely on when they cannot motivate players.  They are also cliches coaches rely on when trying to convince players without talent to try hard in practice so the players with talent get some work in.

The same cliches are abused by media personalities to fill air space when they don't know anything about the sport they are covering.  It is no different than they way we all fille air space in elementary school during a book report about a book we didn't read.

[pg04]

"attitude, enthusiasm, heart, guts, etc."  are cliches coaches rely on when they cannot motivate players.  They are also cliches coaches rely on when trying to convince players without talent to try hard in practice so the players with talent get some work in.

The same cliches are abused by media personalities to fill air space when they don't know anything about the sport they are covering.  It is no different than they way we all fille air space in elementary school during a book report about a book we didn't read.

I hope you aren't anyone's coach. 

[JQV]

Why PG?

I coached all through law school and my teams were great.  We led the nation in scoring twice (averaged about 119 ppg) and I sent 8 of the 12 kids off to D1 or JuCo scholarships for either basketball or football.

[Saxon73]

If "attitude and desire, etc "can't win over talent there never has been or will be a game termed an "upset."

[JQV]

Why not Saxon?  There are reasons the more-talented team doesn't win.  The reasons just aren't those cliches.

Let's do this.  Someone tell me how those intangible qualities help a less-talented team win and do so without resorting to cliche or lines that come from NFL Films.

[Saxon73]

Why not Saxon?  There are reasons the more-talented team doesn't win.  The reasons just aren't those cliches.

Let's do this.  Someone tell me how those intangible qualities help a less-talented team win and do so without resorting to cliche or lines that come from NFL Films.

JQV,

Let's do this.  How many and what are the reasons better talent gets "upset."

To me an "upset" implies the more talented team is expected to win.  This is expected objectively (past performance, etc.) 

It would seem the loss of the more talented team may very well, in some instances, come about due to subjective reasons.

[JQV]

I have identified a half-dozen reasons in my other posts.  Read those and then we'll talk.

[Saxon73]

I have identified a half-dozen reasons in my other posts.  Read those and then we'll talk.

JQV,

Regardless, I found two - Strategy and Execution(less mistakes).  My real thoughts come down to that I find it hard to believe you don't seem to believe in the subjective, emotional type of effects on athletes.  In my years of competition it was apparent often enough.

[pg04]

I have identified a half-dozen reasons in my other posts.  Read those and then we'll talk.

JQV,

Regardless, I found two - Strategy and Execution(less mistakes).  My real thoughts come down to that I find it hard to believe you don't seem to believe in the subjective, emotional type of effects on athletes.  In my years of competition it was apparent often enough.

Apparently he's a robot. 

[E8]

e8
what injuries are there for fisher- i havent heard anything.....

.  They are a little banged up on defense.

[gobombers]

Any updates on the Ithaca game?