Talent or chemistry.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

To apply a real world example-

 

The Heat had great chemistry in the playoffs.

 

But there is no way they win the title without the super talent of Wade.

712707[/snapback]

 

 

yeah and creating fouls by simply breathing on him

 

 

Chemistry is not something you build over night and over time is more important but I dont care how much chemistry you have if you dont have talent you're not gonna win.

[MikeSpeed]

But does good team chemistry make players look talented?

Or does a coach's proper use of a players physical tools make him appear talented?

There must be a gazillion cases of players who looked great while playing for a certain team, left for the money, and fell off the map because they were not as good as their teammates or system made them seem.

Hence the converse must also be true. A talented player playing on a bad team will appear bad also.

The Daniel Snyder Redskins (before Gibbs) are my example of... you can't buy a championship, because you can't buy team chemistry.

Note: I detest that guy. Snyder not Gibbs.

[1959BillsFan]

In actuality you need a combination of both talent AND chemistry.

 

With the NFLPA and the CBA, there is much more of a drive towards individual statistics, which in turn, drive salaries and bonuses. Now a days, a talented player wants to maximize his contract and the only way to do that is through individual statistics.

 

BUT, with football being a team sport; in order to succeed (WIN), you need to have the entire team working with each other and NOT as individuals. This is the where the chemistry issue takes hold. It isn't all about one or two or three players with vast amounts of talent, it is about 11 guys on the field at one time and an interrelationship within the three units: offense, defense, and special teams.

 

Me personally, I would much rather root for a T-E-A-M rather than a single player whining because he is not making his individual statistics.