|
Post by tripsclosed on Mar 30, 2023 10:57:14 GMT -6
Something that is interesting to me is the contrast between Bart Starr and Tom Brad's preferred approaches for how the HC relates to them in front of players.
Starr explained that not too long after Lombardi started, Lombardi kept chewing him out in front of the players. Starr talked to Lombardi later on and said hey coach, if we can come to an understanding, chew me out all you want behind the scenes, but how can you ask me to lead these guys when you chew me out in front of them? Lombardi agreed and well the rest is the stuff literal legends are made of
Brady by contrast, it has been revealed now, encouraged Belichick to chew him out in front of the players to drive home the message that they are all in it together and that if Brady can be chewed out, anyone else is fair game, too...
What do you think about this contrast? Obviously both HC/QBs combos are legendary. I don't in the least want to suggest the Packers were less successful because of Starr's approach-Belichick and Brady were so successful for so long because they are just on, not another level, but several levels above the rest lol
Do you think maybe if nothing else this is a reflection of the change in American culture between Lombardi/Starr days and Belichick/Brady days? Back then, authority figures were really important, so it was important to position a leader of the team in an "unassailable" light, whereas today, people are a lot more suspicious and questioning, and if a leader gets put on a pedestal and treated differently, the players are not gonna take that well at all, and see it as preferential treatment...
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Mar 30, 2023 14:02:22 GMT -6
It might have to do with the changed role of the QB position. Modern QBs, especially a veteran like Brady, have a big say in the offense with check-offs but the play call comes from the sideline. Starr, like most QBs at the time, actually called the play in the huddle.
Another difference is Starr's role on the team. When that interaction happened Starr was NOT the established starter. While Starr competed with other potential starting QBs it was important to avoid dividing the team.
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Mar 30, 2023 21:20:19 GMT -6
It might have to do with the changed role of the QB position. Modern QBs, especially a veteran like Brady, have a big say in the offense with check-offs but the play call comes from the sideline. Starr, like most QBs at the time, actually called the play in the huddle. Another difference is Starr's role on the team. When that interaction happened Starr was NOT the established starter. While Starr competed with other potential starting QBs it was important to avoid dividing the team. Good points, coach
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 31, 2023 13:43:32 GMT -6
interesting dichotomy for sure
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Apr 1, 2023 0:55:23 GMT -6
It might have to do with the changed role of the QB position. Modern QBs, especially a veteran like Brady, have a big say in the offense with check-offs but the play call comes from the sideline. Starr, like most QBs at the time, actually called the play in the huddle. Another difference is Starr's role on the team. When that interaction happened Starr was NOT the established starter. While Starr competed with other potential starting QBs it was important to avoid dividing the team. That first point was my initial thought as well. In chewing out Starr, Lombardi was potentially undermining team confidence in the offenses play caller. This was not the case with Brady. Of course the obvious difference, as has been implied, is that modern media portrayals of qbs, and their relative value to the team, isolates them somewhat already. Often times its portrayed as 1qb vs the other (ignoring the impact of the other players). And QBs are often payed as such. This can isolate them nowadays, and limit their perceived ability to relate to their teammates. I imagine qbs 60 years back were viewed more as one-of-the-boys, than they are now,
|
|
|
Post by morris on Apr 1, 2023 6:53:49 GMT -6
Kind of a combination of the two was Bill Parcells and Phil Simms. Parcells would chew Simms out in the front of the team. Simms went to him about it and Parcells explained that if the team saw him chew out Simms then he would chew out anyone. Once Simms understood the why he didn’t take it personal.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Apr 1, 2023 21:20:07 GMT -6
Kind of a combination of the two was Bill Parcells and Phil Simms. Parcells would chew Simms out in the front of the team. Simms went to him about it and Parcells explained that if the team saw him chew out Simms then he would chew out anyone. Once Simms understood the why he didn’t take it personal. I think that's overthinking it. This isn't really a comparison between then and now. It's one particular situation against one other. In 1959 Bart Starr wasn't HALL OF FAMER BART STARR. He was a 17th round draft pick who was in his fifth year who couldn't pin down the starting QB job on what had been a bad team. He was a soft-spoken guy whose toughness was questioned. He only started 4 games in 1958. But when he was on the field he had to be the leader. Lombardi recognized that.
|
|