Results 37 to 48 of 101
-
05-13-2014, 06:33 PM #37
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
The guy I want is the one with tons of talent. And will work really hard because he wants to be the absolute best he can be.
Is that too much to ask?
-
-
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
like your thinking, let me start with it and expand a little on my own
Hard work +great talent = HOF Career
Hard work +some talent = decent NFL career
Hard work +little talent = practice quad placeholder for somebody better to come along
Great talent +some work = decent NFL career
Great talent +little work = journeyman NFL career
(McKinnie cut by one, traded for a future 7th by another and currently not signed even though he is volunteering to play RT for them and Miami doesn't have a RT, as a matter of face Miami reached in the first to take Ju'wuan James in the 1st, then came back and took Billy Turner N.Dak. State in the 3rd) Tell me Bryant McKinnie didn't cause the Dolphins FO to have an obsession with getting a tackle at any cost. McKinnie did enough work here to get a contract then stopped and benched/traded .... then he changed Miami's draft
Neither extreme works, need a blend of both but hard work heavier is always more appreciated and easier to live with when 2 players are equal in production ... I'd take 70% hard work with 30% talent over 70% talent and 30% hard work in most "non-skill" positions any dayat one point of my life I was exactly Pi years old
-
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
-
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
I know weve had these talks before and correct me if im wrong but you do hate talented players that dont work hard because of your own experiences of busting your ass to get the most out of what you were given.
I think this an onion question where if two guys are similar talents but one has work ethic and one doesnt, you go with the hard worker 99-100. But if we were talking what happens on the field being similar, meaning a better skillset and bad drive vs a better drive and less skill, what does it matter? Interesting topic and I hope you started it for an article.-JAB
-
05-14-2014, 12:03 AM #42Steve Flacco, Apparently
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- Pikesville
- Posts
- 4,300
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
Just some food for thought but consider the following guys. In my mind they represent the best you can hope for in terms of talent vs work:
Peyton Manning is not a good athlete. He's slow, never had more than average arm strength, and completely dependent on great oline play due to his lack of ability to extend plays where protection breaks down.
But he studies and works as hard as anyone and because of that is a technician in every sense of the word on a football field. He is arguably the most successful passer in terms of individual achievement in league history. Adequate talent with near perfect effort and intelligence equals HOFer.
John Ogden was a football god. Defensive rushers had to take a taxi to get around his reach, his footwork was flawless, and his run blocking was dominate. He could lead a power sweep better than anyone I've ever seen not named Gene Upshaw. He was both an unstoppable force AND an immovable object.
He also despised working out and avoided lifting weights practically completely. He watched relatively little film compared to say Ray Lewis because of how well he could memorize his opponents' tendencies without trying. He has admitted that football was fairly easy for him and his natural talent and impossible physical dimensions combined to make him the most dominate LTs in league history. I'm not saying he's lazy, just that his talent vastly dwarfed his effort. Perfect talent plus adequate work equals another HOFer.
To me those two guys represent the widest possible gulfs between natural god given ability and skills earned through sweat, study, and constant repetitive practice.
Basically this shows that there is no right answer. A guy has to be willing to work at least some, and he must be at least an adequate athlete, but you can get GOAT performances from either extreme.
Personally, I think a guy with great talent but only minimally adequate work ethic (Ogden, Moss, Ngata, Artie Donovan) is more likely to be a game changer than their hard working and smart but physically deficient counterparts like Wes Welker, Manning, Jarret Johnson, or Ricky Prohel.
Ideally though you should just get a Ray Lewis. A physically gifted, hard working, intellectually obsessed paragon.
Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH Fierce using TapatalkMy motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron
-
05-14-2014, 02:21 AM #43
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
Great thread.
The 2013 book "The Sports Gene: Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance" by SI writer David Epstein provides a fascinating examination of this topic. I heard him interviewed on 105.7 last year and ordered the book that day.
Long story short, examples can be cited of amazing athletic success (Olympic Gold) by those who had "good genes" and put in little hard work and others who expended "hard work" (i.e., at least 10,000 hours of refined training) but were apparently born without genetic advantage for their discipline.
As others have posted, invariably the all time greats tend to have both "good genes" (i.e., innate talent) and be extremely "hard workers".
Most interestingly when probed about the reason for their success, they tend to be dismissive of their own innate talent and tend to think others do not appreciate the hard work they have expended. According to this book, coaches should value both.
-
05-14-2014, 08:17 AM #44
-
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
I find I am agreeing with this.
Great talent always has the better chance to produce a game changing play
The corollary may be that hard worker always has the smaller chance of giving up a game changing play.
McGahee went 77 yds for a TD and the hard work stopped or else McClain wouldn't have laid another 82 on them.
What we are calling hard work has at least 2 components... one is putting time in (practice, weight room reps, filmstudy) and the other is not taking time off/plays off... of which we can form lists of big names who gained a reputation for doing so..... McKinnie if the run was going to the other side, T.O. if the ball wasn't coming his way, the biggest I ever saw was Hainesworth just laying on the ground as the QB danced in the backfield for another 5 seconds
at one point of my life I was exactly Pi years old
-
05-14-2014, 09:36 AM #46Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Posts
- 958
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
The problem with this thread is that you assume a certain amount of talent to start with before going any further, which makes this question unfair. In reality, you NEED extreme talent, but you don't NEED an extreme work ethic. I'm sure that you could find millions of people off the street willing to work their tail off for millions of dollars, fame, and the chance to play a kid's game. But you won't find millions of people with the physical attributes necessary to not get killed at the NFL level. Does anybody on this thread sitting at their computers really believe that they could suit up for the Ravens if they just worked hard enough? If you do, then why haven't you?
-
-
05-14-2014, 10:51 AM #48
Re: Natural Talent or Hard Work: Which is more valuable?
Bookmarks