The Individual vs. the Team

[mayoclinic]

2 reports from ProFootballTalk today caught my eye:

Le’Veon Bell carried the ball 33 times for 204 yards and a touchdown Monday night against the Tennessee Titans.

Backup running back LeGarrette Blounthad zero carries for zero yards. And that fact apparently isn’t sitting well with Blount.

According to Ed Bouchette of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Blount left the field prior to the conclusion of Monday night’s game in Tennessee presumably upset with his role with the team.

Outside of his 118-yard performance against Carolina in Week 3, Blount hasn’t found much success in his limited chances for the Steelers. He’s received 10 carries in a game just twice and hasn’t rushed for more than 30 yards in a game in eight games since Carolina.

Blount had carried five times for zero yards against the New York Jets last week before the Steelers elected not to use him against Tennessee.

The report states Blount “has been an internal problem” and claim he’s been “dragging down” Bell.

Blount is under contract through 2015 with the Steelers. However, if the team actually sees his presence as a big issue, it wouldn’t be any surprise if Pittsburgh elected to cut ties now.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-blount-left-field-before-conclusion-of-game/

And:

On Sunday, 49ers linebacker Ahmad Brooks spent most of the game on the bench after he reportedly balked at the notion of splitting time with Aaron Lynch and the returning Aldon Smith against the Giants.

Coach Jim Harbaugh would only say Sunday that the 49ers and Brooks were working through something and that the team needed the linebacker if they are going to win a championship and he wasn’t more forthcoming about the explanation for Brooks’s long afternoon on the sideline, although he did say that everyone’s moving forward.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...h-says-49ers-moving-onward-with-ahmad-brooks/

Blount, of course, became a national sensation with the Pats last year and helped carry the offense down the stretch. The Pats chose not to match a 2 year $3.85M contract offer from the Steelers. Brooks was outstanding during the latter part of the season and playoffs last year for the 49ers. Now both guys are apparently unhappy with their roles and their playing time.

BB's always been about the team, not the individuals. What can be achieved when you get 53 guys on the same page, doing their job and without ego is staggering - but very, very hard to achieve. Guys like Jonas Gray and Tim Wright have been great examples so far this season, stepping up and performing when called upon - but also guys like Stevan Ridley, Danny Amendola and Aaron Dobson, who have dealt with decreased playing time, stats, and/or injuries without becoming distractions.

I love the talent level of this Pats team. But I also love the unselfishness and lack of ego, at least so far. Maybe Blount's pouting is another case of BB knowing better than the fan boards, and explains a decision that many of us found perplexing. In any case, I'm very happy with the way this team is developing as a team.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I love the talent level of this Pats team. But I also love the unselfishness and lack of ego, at least so far. Maybe Blount's pouting is another case of BB knowing better than the fan boards, and explains a decision that many of us found perplexing. In any case, I'm very happy with the way this team is developing as a team.

Yep. I'm sure that there have been players in this org that have taken issue with their playing time. The difference here is that BB and the organization will not tolerate "me-first" players and players are required to check their egos and their own agendas at the door.

The Patriots were interested in re-signing Blount- for the right price. My understanding is that they didn't let him go b/c of any locker room/attitude issues.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

I think it also helps a lot that the Patriots are a highly meritocratic organization. If you're not on the field, it's because you're not playing as well as the people ahead of you on the depth chart, or you provide less overall positional flexibility.

This organization provides ample opportunity to those who work hard and seize opportunity that happens upon them. Look at Ninkovich or Edelman or any number of the UDFA's or former practice squad players who've made the team over the years.

 

[mayoclinic]

The Patriots were interested in re-signing Blount- for the right price. My understanding is that they didn't let him go b/c of any locker room/attitude issues.

Probably not. But it's easy to be happy with the team when you're a featured part of it and are performing well. It's much less easy when your playing time is decreased, and when your stats are suffering. It wouldn't shock me if BB keeps a close eye on what kind of players he has - especially after the 2009 team chemistry debacle. All kinds of players pass through over the years, and sometimes you don't have a lot of choice when dealing with short term needs. But I'm sure that BB evaluates all new guys (like Blount, Talib, Tim Wright, Jonathan Casillas, Akeem Ayers, Alan Branch) and tries to get a sense as to whether they are "true Patriots" in terms of their work ethic, attitude, unselfishness, etc., as well as in terms of their skill set and what they bring to the table.

 

[patsfan-1982]

blount is the type of back that will have 8 att pre game for a average of 3 yards per for the most of the season until he has a back to back 15 att games of 150 yards he is way to inconsistent for a team fighting for a playoff off spot who also has a true lead back to give him the ball,

look even back to last year in his best games Stevan Ridley was averaging over 5 yards per game in does games I like his brake away speed but other then that blount is a below average RB

 

[Mike the Brit]

You'd be very naive to think that this kind of issue never comes up on the Patriots -- though you're right that BB makes it a principle never to let them develop, even if it leads to parting company with a talented and expensive player. What's different is that BB's policy of keeping team matters private and out of the media means that, when there is a problem of this kind, it doesn't get publicity.

 

[mayoclinic]

blount is the type of back that will have 8 att pre game for a average of 3 yards per for the most of the season until he has a back to back 15 att games of 150 yards he is way to inconsistent for a team fighting for a playoff off spot who also has a true lead back to give him the ball,

look even back to last year in his best games Stevan Ridley was averaging over 5 yards per game in does games I like his brake away speed but other then that blount is a below average RB

Two numbers from Jonas Gray's game on Sunday night stand out to me:

1. 0 negative rushes on 38 attempts
2. 104 yards (out of 199) achieved after contact.

If Gray can keep doing that, wow. If he can add a little versatility in the receiving game ...

 

[JMC00]

IMO part of the reason Belichick released Kelly. Not that he was a problem at the time but he could have become a problem if Belichick would have said "tough, play out the deal you agreed to"

 

[mayoclinic]

You'd be very naive to think that this kind of issue never comes up on the Patriots -- though you're right that BB makes it a principle never to let them develop, even if it leads to parting company with a talented and expensive player. What's different is that BB's policy of keeping team matters private and out of the media means that, when there is a problem of this kind, it doesn't get publicity.

I certainly don't mean to imply that it doesn't come up. It has to. As I say, all kinds of players pass through the team. You sign a guy and see what you have, in terms of talent, skill set, attitude, etc. I think that after 2009 BB is probably VERY sensitive to this issue, and nips things in the bud pretty quickly.

 

[patfanken]

2 reports from ProFootballTalk today caught my eye:



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-blount-left-field-before-conclusion-of-game/

And:



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...h-says-49ers-moving-onward-with-ahmad-brooks/

Blount, of course, became a national sensation with the Pats last year and helped carry the offense down the stretch. The Pats chose not to match a 2 year $3.85M contract offer from the Steelers. Brooks was outstanding during the latter part of the season and playoffs last year for the 49ers. Now both guys are apparently unhappy with their roles and their playing time.

BB's always been about the team, not the individuals. What can be achieved when you get 53 guys on the same page, doing their job and without ego is staggering - but very, very hard to achieve. Guys like Jonas Gray and Tim Wright have been great examples so far this season, stepping up and performing when called upon - but also guys like Stevan Ridley, Danny Amendola and Aaron Dobson, who have dealt with decreased playing time, stats, and/or injuries without becoming distractions.

I love the talent level of this Pats team. But I also love the unselfishness and lack of ego, at least so far. Maybe Blount's pouting is another case of BB knowing better than the fan boards, and explains a decision that many of us found perplexing. In any case, I'm very happy with the way this team is developing as a team.

I had similar thoughts when I read this report this morning. But I think the "unselfishness" that is necessary to create a great team and locker room goes both ways. Not only does the individual player have to be willing to sublimate his own ego for the good of the team, there has to be a climate or culture that makes it easy for the player to agree to it.

Players have to have huge egos and lots of self confidence in order to make it on a roster. The absurdity of Sergio Brown trash talking Gronk only points out how real that statement is. It takes a strong personality to survive in the NFL. Now the question arises how do you take 53 of these ultra alpha personalities and mold them into a unified team. I think there are 2 key factors.

The first is communication/respect. You have to be straight with players, but also create roles for them that make them feel important to the team's success, even if it doesn't show up on the field. The players have to honestly believe that their coaches have the best interests of the team in mind when they make the kind of decisions that might piss them off.

This staff has proven time and again that they are going to put their players in the best positions to win. They know (or believe) that they will enter each game with a better game plan. That if they do what the coaches ask, they will most likely win the game, regardless of injuries, weather, or refs. This is a kind of belief that can only come from past history.

The second key factor is leadership - Do the key players in that locker room buy in too. Given guys like Brady, Vince, Mayo, Slater, and Connolly, not only does the important leadership buy in, they are almost cult-like acolytes. What is most pleasing to me is that you see the torch being passed on when you listen to the "next generation" when guys like McCourty, Hightower, and Jones speak In reality its not the Patriot way, its the RIGHT way to build a football team. And in the end, its the most fun as well.

So in the end, if you make sure every player knows his role and understands its importance to the unified effort, it will go a long way to alleviate the potential of clashing egos. Giving out those black T shirts to practice squad guys and back ups might seem cliched to us, but are very important within that locker room

When I first got into coaching back in the late 60's, you always wanted to have kids who would go through that proverbial brick wall for you. Fortunately I was taught that you were much more likely to get that result if you explained to the kid WHY it was in his and the team's best interests to go through that wall.

BTW- this is a massively over simplification of this phenomenon. Entire books have been written trying to explain what it works and doesn't. Clearly what the Pats do works. This team has reinvented itself at least 3 times over the past 14 yr and the only constants have been Brady, BB and Kraft, and even the year without Brady, being led by a QB who hadn't started a game since HS, produced 11 wins. From how they teach and develop players to how they teach and develop coaches, and scouts. It really is about the "system" that has been created that continues the success. It's not the "only" system to be successful, but for longevity, its right up there.

Thanks Mayo for initiating the topic

 

[BobDigital]

Coaches in the NFL have different levels of tolerance for a me first type of player. BB has a much lower tolerance than most. However a few points.

#1 Bill has employed me first players in the past and signed guys fully knowing what they are. However he only does this is they produced to a high level justifying their ego. Revis is a recent example of this, He is not the trouble maker Blount can be but still is clearly me first

#2 Players have every right to be me first. They have short careers and not getting enough touches can be the difference between a vet minimum deal and a 2 yr 3.85M deal. Blount is not getting a chance to show his stuff and it is hurting his next contract. I don't think having a fit is going to help that but he has a reason to dislike it and want to get on the field cause it does financially hurt him to be off it.

#3 Team first is just as selfish in some respects. Teams ask players to take pay cuts and leverage them all the time. We all look past this though and are quick to forgive it because it helps our team. But look at it from a player's perspective. When management does something they are applauded and backed up by the fans. When a player does the same or a similar thing they are called selfish and a trouble maker. Very hypercritical if you ask me.

I am not saying Blount acting the way he does is excused cause it is not. It is a business and you need to know going in life isn't fair and neither is the NFL. However can we blame a player for being pissed about it? I don't think so.

 

[mayoclinic]

#1 Bill has employed me first players in the past and signed guys fully knowing what they are. However he only does this is they produced to a high level justifying their ego. Revis is a recent example of this, He is not the trouble maker Blount can be but still is clearly me first.

Revis is a "me first" player in terms of contract, but not in terms of his role or function on the team. He never made any waves about being used in zone with Tampa Bay, for example. Moss is a better example of a guy who got frustrated if he didn't get the ball enough.

#3 Team first is just as selfish in some respects. Teams ask players to take pay cuts and leverage them all the time. We all look past this though and are quick to forgive it because it helps our team. But look at it from a player's perspective. When management does something they are applauded and backed up by the fans. When a player does the same or a similar thing they are called selfish and a trouble maker. Very hypercritical if you ask me.

Again, I think you have to separate contract issues from performance and playing issues. The team has every right to use players as they see best. What you do with a guy's pay check is a separate issue. Obviously, they overlap, as performance affects earning ability, bonuses, etc. The recent decision to drop the level of Sebastian Vollmer's incentives because the team wanted to use more of a rotation that would decrease his playing time is a good example of the team taking an equitable approach to this kind of situation.

 

[ZoisKing]

The Patriots were interested in re-signing Blount- for the right price. My understanding is that they didn't let him go b/c of any locker room/attitude issues.

That's what's so great about this team's locker room. It is rock solid. Petty conflicts don't have a chance to become something. If a player shows that that is what they are about then they are gone. This locker room has constant infusions of team captains from college programs which only increases its solidity. Great character guys don't succumb to that weak BS.

 

[ZoisKing]

Moss is a better example of a guy who got frustrated if he didn't get the ball enough.

Exactly. And he was traded away. He thought he could revert to that "me first" game now that he had become established. IIRC, didn't he want to come back after he bottomed out in Minny? He was smart enough to know he messed up.

 

[Ring 6]

Coaches in the NFL have different levels of tolerance for a me first type of player. BB has a much lower tolerance than most. However a few points.

#1 Bill has employed me first players in the past and signed guys fully knowing what they are. However he only does this is they produced to a high level justifying their ego. Revis is a recent example of this, He is not the trouble maker Blount can be but still is clearly me first

Everything I have heard about Revis is that he has been an excellent teammate. He has consistently talked about the team,not his own performance, and spread the credit when it gets thrown toward him.

#2 Players have every right to be me first. They have short careers and not getting enough touches can be the difference between a vet minimum deal and a 2 yr 3.85M deal. Blount is not getting a chance to show his stuff and it is hurting his next contract. I don't think having a fit is going to help that but he has a reason to dislike it and want to get on the field cause it does financially hurt him to be off it.

He is on the bench because the other guy is better. Should every guy not good enough to start just quit? There haven't exactly been a line of teams waiting to make him their #1.

#3 Team first is just as selfish in some respects. Teams ask players to take pay cuts and leverage them all the time. We all look past this though and are quick to forgive it because it helps our team. But look at it from a player's perspective. When management does something they are applauded and backed up by the fans. When a player does the same or a similar thing they are called selfish and a trouble maker. Very hypercritical if you ask me.

This is apples to oranges. Teams make decisions in order to make the team better. Kraft isn't going to Vince Wilfork for a pay cut so that he can line his pockets, he is doing it in order to make the team better.
You also seem to miss the fact that the owners hand out enormous signing bonusses that they may get nothing in return for. Look at the cost of Hernandez.
Of course management making the team better is applauded by the fans, and a player holding out and hurting the team is not. I don't understand what you are expecting here.

I am not saying Blount acting the way he does is excused cause it is not. It is a business and you need to know going in life isn't fair and neither is the NFL. However can we blame a player for being pissed about it? I don't think so.

I wouldn't expect him to be happy to be a backup (although that is clearly what he is) but there is a difference between not being good enough and working to do something about it, and just quitting on your team.

 

[Ring 6]

Exactly. And he was traded away. He thought he could revert to that "me first" game now that he had become established. IIRC, didn't he want to come back after he bottomed out in Minny? He was smart enough to know he messed up.

Moss wasn't traded because he wanted the ball.
Moss was traded because he started feeling sorry for himself, his effort went in the toilet, and at the same time his skills had eroded. If he gave 100% and had his head on straight he would have been here 2 more years.

 

[Sicilian]

I think in Blount's case it really was just a matter of cost versus cost of replacement. Blount got a LOT of pub (and rightfully so) for his big performances late in the season last year, but the biggest one was a 150+ yard 4 TD performance against the Colts. As we saw this Sunday, a hard working UDFA can do the same thing to that same team. I liked Blount, and I think BB did too, but he's not an Adrian Peterson (on the field) type RB. He's a guy who can be replaced, and the team didn't feel the need to invest the extra money in the position. I doubt his attitude played too big a role in it.

 

[ZoisKing]

Moss wasn't traded because he wanted the ball.
Moss was traded because he started feeling sorry for himself, his effort went in the toilet, and at the same time his skills had eroded. If he gave 100% and had his head on straight he would have been here 2 more years.

My memory is fuzzy on it, so I went and researched it. It was apparently a new contract he wanted, and New England wasn't going to give it to him. That, and as you've said, his skills diminishing were the biggest pieces of the trade to Minny.

As for on the field, if he wasn't getting the ball he wasn't playing all out. He would dog it fairly often. He never was a great all around receiver, and that's that, but he could have at least tried running more routes even when he wasn't the primary receiver on a play. From my perspective, he was lazy out there his last year here.

 

[Oswlek]

You'd be very naive to think that this kind of issue never comes up on the Patriots -- though you're right that BB makes it a principle never to let them develop, even if it leads to parting company with a talented and expensive player. What's different is that BB's policy of keeping team matters private and out of the media means that, when there is a problem of this kind, it doesn't get publicity.

Agreed, but walking off the field means the issue has progressed well beyond the "behind the scenes" stage. Even if we assume a reasonable amount of internal scuffling, Bill is still doing something to avoid situations like this.

I personally believe that Bill read something in Blount gave him reservations about making too strong a commitment, but I think he was terribly overrated last year so I can't claim to be wholly unbiased.

 

[mayoclinic]

I personally believe that Bill read something in Blount gave him reservations about making too strong a commitment, but I think he was terribly overrated last year so I can't claim to be wholly unbiased.

From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

The Steelers won a game but have a new problem, a rare one for them. Backup halfback LeGarrette Blount, apparently upset because he did not have a carry against Tennessee, left the field before the game was over. He dressed and left the locker room, apparently headed for the team bus that would take them to the airport. At least one player thought they should leave him in Nashville.

Blount has been an internal problem for at least a month for the Steelers and sources told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that he is dragging down star halfback Le’Veon Bell, even though that obviously was not the case Monday night when Bell ran 33 times for 204 yards.

There was no immediate indication what, if any, discipline coach Mike Tomlin might take against Blount but some players have been pushing for them to release him because of his poor attitude.

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/...ield-before-game-is-over/stories/201411180148

Weird stuff, if true. I can't recall players on a team ever pushing for someone to be released.