Character vs. Talent

Which is the most important trait for a player to possess: character or talent?

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
#151
#151
BigPapaVol said:
Nobody on earth exceeds their natural talent. The guys you have listed have more talent than those around them, period. Hard work and Iverson do not belong in the same paragraph.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
I'm a huge Iverson supporter. That doesn't change the fact that every coach he's ever played for bemoans how incredibly lazy he is.
 
#152
#152
hatvol96 said:
I'm a huge Iverson supporter. That doesn't change the fact that every coach he's ever played for bemoans how incredibly lazy he is.
Click to expand...

He just happens to be the quickest player ever, and by a decent margin.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#154
#154
hmanvolfan said:
Still? Even after quitting on two teams in a row?
Click to expand...
He should have never signed on to play this year. He's dealing with significant, serious off floor issues. However, players always think they can balance those things. He's not the first guy to be wrong about that and won't be the last.
 
#155
#155
BigPapaVol said:
Nobody on earth exceeds their natural talent. The guys you have listed have more talent than those around them, period. Hard work and Iverson do not belong in the same paragraph.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

But won't you agree then that some people simply fail to maximize their natural talent? Or is getting to the NFL, NBA, etc pre-ordained from birth? i.e. those that have the "natural talent" will inevitably make it? I don't think too many people would agree with this Darwinian selection... The truth is that what separates those from the professional ranks and those that we would consider "busts" stems from something other than talent.... I assure you that there are players out there with an equal amount of talent as Allen Iverson that never made it to the NBA, much less led the league in scoring....


I should point out though that I'm not agreeing with those before me that put "character" over "talent." I'm simply re-defining my use of character so that it is limiting solely to that player's dedication to his sport.... There are many professional players out there that may lack character in regards to society and our legal structure, but when it comes to their sport are as dedicated and hard-working as anyone.
 
#156
#156
hatvol96 said:
Maurice Clarett=Too slow to play in the NFL.
Mike Williams=See Maurice Clarett.
James Banks=Too dumb to work the counter at the Cumberland Avenue Krystal.
Click to expand...

How many times have you heard those same arguments said about players that then excelled in professional ranks? Jerry Rice was too slow, as was Emmitt Smith....What separated them from Claurett and Williams?
 
#157
#157
WPAINE said:
How many times have you heard those same arguments said about players that then excelled in professional ranks? Jerry Rice was too slow, as was Emmitt Smith....What separated them from Claurett and Williams?
Click to expand...
They weren't as slow. It's not complex.
 
#158
#158
hatvol96 said:
They weren't as slow. It's not complex.
Click to expand...

It is also not that simple.. He ran a 4.56 40 in the combine. Sure, his one knock was that he didn't have great deep speed, but scouts knew that going into it and still chose him as the 10th overall pick.... They claimed that he had the physical and natural ability to make up for his lack of speed....


and Jerry Rice ran a 4.6 40 at his combine...

You can't simply say that measureables made the different between Mike Williams and Jerry Rice.. Sure, maybe there was more talent underneath for Rice, but to completely brush aside the character differences is incredibly short-sided given the extremity of their outcomes.


And I don't think we even have to use Rice (arguably the greatest WR of all time) to make my point. There are plenty of WR's and RB's with Williams' and Clarett's measureables that had far more success in the NFL than they did....
 
#159
#159
If some people with "high" character play at a high-level and/or win championships, and others with the same do not - and if those without "high" character can or cannot do the same....doesn't that refute any notion of a strong correlation between the two?

It's like watching people argue the existence of gravity while plummeting to earth.

For those who insist upon the belief that character is the deciding factor in either playing at a high level or winning championships, close your eyes and envision any of the following:

Billy Graham and Mr. Rogers taking on Venus and Serena in a doubles match.

Mother Theresa blocking Jared Allen.

John Wooden taking Jordan to the rim.

Now, can continue to hold such a belief - despite these truthful albeit admittedly exagerated scenarios ?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#160
#160
I don't care what Rice ran at his combine, he wasn't as slow as a 4.6 would seem to indicate at a combine today.
 
#161
#161
Tenacious D said:
If some people with "high" character play at a high-level and/or win championships, and others with the same do not - and if those without "high" character can or cannot do the same....doesn't that refute any notion of a strong correlation between the two?

It's like watching people argue the existence of gravity while plummeting to earth.

For those who insist upon the belief that character is the deciding factor in either playing at a high level or winning championships, close your eyes and envision any of the following:

Billy Graham and Mr. Rogers taking on Venus and Serena in a doubles match.

Mother Theresa blocking Jared Allen.

John Wooden taking Jordan to the rim.

Now, can continue to hold such a belief - despite these truthful albeit admittedly exagerated scenarios ?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

My argument was that once you reach a certain level, one's natural talent evens out and what separates them from busts is correlelated to a lot of things (i.e. luck, team, opportunity, etc) and one of those is character...

The disparity in talent used in your example miss the point. I'm not saying that if you place a middle school bball player and a college bball player that the middle school kid will win bc he has better character.. Obviously, when talent levels are that extreme then talent will take over... BUT, you aren't going to see a talent disparity in the NBA or NFL as great as the examples you are using.
 
#162
#162
kptvol said:
I don't care what Rice ran at his combine, he wasn't as slow as a 4.6 would seem to indicate at a combine today.
Click to expand...

I wanted folks to take away more from my posts than just that.... But yeah, he seemed to be faster than a 4.6, but that is because he played faster than a 4.6, not because he actually ran faster than that... He was the best route runner in the history of the game, and those small things make a huge difference especially when you are talking about 1/10th of seconds.
 
#163
#163
WPAINE said:
It is also not that simple.. He ran a 4.56 40 in the combine. Sure, his one knock was that he didn't have great deep speed, but scouts knew that going into it and still chose him as the 10th overall pick.... They claimed that he had the physical and natural ability to make up for his lack of speed....


and Jerry Rice ran a 4.6 40 at his combine...

You can't simply say that measureables made the different between Mike Williams and Jerry Rice.. Sure, maybe there was more talent underneath for Rice, but to completely brush aside the character differences is incredibly short-sided given the extremity of their outcomes.


And I don't think we even have to use Rice (arguably the greatest WR of all time) to make my point. There are plenty of WR's and RB's with Williams' and Clarett's measureables that had far more success in the NFL than they did....
Click to expand...

I haven't heard anyone arguing that a "high" character player is undesirable, nor that this somehow prevents them from over-achieving their "low-character" counterparts.

However, at some point, unless the more talented player slips (i.e. doesn't train, study, prepare themselves, etc. ) superior talent cannot be overcome, and will almost always win.

Why? Because "character" might make me put 100 more hours a week in the gym, or to commit my playbook to memory.....but all of that is wholly irrelevant when it comes time for me to stop Kobe off the dribble. Or when I've got Randy Moss running past me on the post. Or when I try to throw the smoke past Reggie Jackson.

Character is not unimportant, and one could argue that its most desirable - but talent is both first and most necessary.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#164
#164
Tenacious D said:
I haven't heard anyone arguing that a "high" character player is undesirable, nor that this somehow prevents them from over-achieving their "low-character" counterparts.

However, at some point, unless the more talented player slips (i.e. doesn't train, study, prepare themselves, etc. ) superior talent cannot be overcome, and will almost always win.

Why? Because "character" might make me put 100 more hours a week in the gym, or to commit my playbook to memory.....but all of that is wholly irrelevant when it comes time for me to stop Kobe off the dribble. Or when I've got Randy Moss running past me on the post. Or when I try to throw the smoke past Reggie Jackson.

Character is not unimportant, and one could argue that its most desirable - but talent is both first and most necessary.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...


Kobe and Randy are also high character guys when it comes to their sports. So yes, if you work as equally hard as they do then chances are their talent is superior to yours so they will win out.... My point is that that is why the greatest athletes of all time are the greatest athletes, because when it came to their respective sports, they all had great character and practiced hard, etc...even if they exhibited character flaws within society, they always busted their tails when it came to their sport.

and if you read back, then BigPapaVol seemed to indicate that talent was the only thing out there. almost suggesting a Darwinian philosophy to making it to the pros... I would like him and hatvol to come back and address the points I brought up in addressing their comments
 
#165
#165
WPAINE said:
Kobe and Randy are also high character guys when it comes to their sports.
Click to expand...

:lolabove: Kobe Bryant and Randy Moss meet your definition of high character guys? Seriously? Randy Moss was considered such a low-character guy that Jerry Jones passed on drafting him! Does it get any more damning than that? Ask the Raiders about Randy Moss' legendary work ethic. I think you'll find that they disagree with you. Is that gargantuan-sized rock on Kobe's wife's finger a symbol of his high character?
 
Last edited:
#166
#166
WPAINE said:
I wanted folks to take away more from my posts than just that.... But yeah, he seemed to be faster than a 4.6, but that is because he played faster than a 4.6, not because he actually ran faster than that... He was the best route runner in the history of the game, and those small things make a huge difference especially when you are talking about 1/10th of seconds.
Click to expand...

I'll bet you his 40 time would be a lot closer to the elite guys of today if the timing implements were equal.
 
#168
#168
Vol423 said:
:lolabove: Kobe Bryant and Randy Moss meet your definition of high character guys? Seriously? Randy Moss was considered such a low-character guy that Jerry Jones passed on drafting him! Does it get any more damning than that? Ask the Raiders about Randy Moss' legendary work ethic. I think you'll find that they disagree with you. Is that gargantuan-sized rock on Kobe's wife's finger a symbol of his high character?
Click to expand...

Again, my definitino of character is clearly different than yours.... I'm using character as it relates to their sports, and their dedication, work ethic, etc... Like I said, this has to be coupled with other things (i.e. luck, team, opportunity).... Thus, character is not synonymous with moral and/or legal issues... Kobe may not be the most moral guy, but he busts his arse in the off-season and is the most competitive guys out there... That's high character....

As for Moss, I guess we just disagree, but keep in mind that another poster used Moss as an example, not me... My point is that there is a lot of talent that seeps through the cracks, so somewhere along the line there has to be an X factor for why these players are dominating their respective leagues, breaking records, etc...
 
#169
#169
kptvol said:
I'll bet you his 40 time would be a lot closer to the elite guys of today if the timing implements were equal.
Click to expand...

hard to bet something that has no definitive answer.... Rice was my favorite player, but what separated him was his route running and hands, not his speed even if his 40 was .1 second faster.
 
#170
#170
WPAINE said:
Again, my definitino of character is clearly different than yours.... I'm using character as it relates to their sports, and their dedication, work ethic, etc... Like I said, this has to be coupled with other things (i.e. luck, team, opportunity).... Thus, character is not synonymous with moral and/or legal issues... Kobe may not be the most moral guy, but he busts his arse in the off-season and is the most competitive guys out there... That's high character....

As for Moss, I guess we just disagree, but keep in mind that another poster used Moss as an example, not me... My point is that there is a lot of talent that seeps through the cracks, so somewhere along the line there has to be an X factor for why these players are dominating their respective leagues, breaking records, etc...
Click to expand...

When you lay the bar of high character on the ground, even snakes can crawl over it. You're not talking about high character. You're talking about work ethic. Kobe is low character, but has a high work ethic. Randy Moss has low character and low work ethic. He is known for basically quitting on games if you don't get him involved by throwing him the ball early. While on the Raiders, he quit on the entire season.

I believe Travis Henry meets your definition of "high character". He practiced and played hard. He played injured. High character? I think not.
 
Last edited:
#171
#171
Vol423 said:
When you lay the bar of high character on the ground, even snakes can crawl over it. You're not talking about high character. You're talking about work ethic. Kobe is low character, but has a high work ethic. Randy Moss has low character and low work ethic.
Click to expand...

What this thread was discussing was which was greater, character or talent... My argument was that once you reach a certain level (i.e. the pros) then talent level for the most part evens out... In other words, you are less likely to see a RB run for 400 yards in a game and score 50 TDs in a year like you could in high school.... So, what separates those that succeed in the professional ranks and those that don't are the intangibles (luck, team, opportunity) but also one's character as it relates to the sport, essentially their work ethic, commitment, film study, etc....

I think this is the only way to explain how some incredibly talented players don't make it to the league, while others in similar talent do....

Also, if we take a step back, this argument is similar to the nature vs. nurture argument.. How much of it is Darwinian and pre-ordained (talent), and how much of it is shaped by us and our actions (character)....
 
#172
#172
WPAINE said:
What this thread was discussing was which was greater, character or talent... My argument was that once you reach a certain level (i.e. the pros) then talent level for the most part evens out... In other words, you are less likely to see a RB run for 400 yards in a game and score 50 TDs in a year like you could in high school.... So, what separates those that succeed in the professional ranks and those that don't are the intangibles (luck, team, opportunity) but also one's character as it relates to the sport, essentially their work ethic, commitment, film study, etc....

I think this is the only way to explain how some incredibly talented players don't make it to the league, while others in similar talent do....

Also, if we take a step back, this argument is similar to the nature vs. nurture argument.. How much of it is Darwinian and pre-ordained (talent), and how much of it is shaped by us and our actions (character)....
Click to expand...

I just added this to my previous post, so you may not have seen this.

I believe Travis Henry meets your definition of "high character". He practiced and played hard. He played injured. High character? I think not.

This thread started out as a discussion of high character versus high talent. I have noticed that you're arguing some absurd notion of the definition of "high character". I'm just trying to figure out why. There is most definitely a very strong distinction between high work ethic and high character. Travis Henry has one. He most definitely lacks the other.
 
#173
#173
WPAINE said:
hard to bet something that has no definitive answer.... Rice was my favorite player, but what separated him was his route running and hands, not his speed even if his 40 was .1 second faster.
Click to expand...

Just saying, the man was faster than Mike Williams.
 
#174
#174
I guess in a round about way my overall point is that I do not think that Professional League are inherently made up of the most naturally talented players in the world....There are other factors that happen between birth and the age of 20-30.... One of those is character development
 
#175
#175
When there is great disparity in natural talent then there are times when all the character and "heart" in the world won't close the gap.

But Hardesty and Coker make a good case study when the gap isn't very wide. IMO, Coker was the most talented RB I've seen at UT. He had everything a RB needs- vision, power, quickness, burst, and great top end speed. Unlike Hardesty, he never got seriously injured.

Hardesty had all of those things as well but not to the same degree plus he was injury prone.

The difference between the two RB's boils down to their values. One guy had character, self-discipline, and determination in abundance. The other didn't.

If UT is recruiting guys who are "close" in talent to the 4* and 5* guys the other teams are getting but have much more "character" then it might work. If the gap is wide in talent... it won't regardless of how well behaved and academically accomplished they are.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top