Some Questions

every team plays better and with more emotion at home.  Thats why it's called home field advantage.
Click to expand...
But you just said it doesn't do much? If a team plays better, as you say, I would say that matters.
Click to expand...
I don't think it does that much, I think it's alil overrated. I think it does fire you up more to have 80,000 cheering for you but it should also fire you up having 80,000 cheering against you.

 
Homefield advantage shouldn't help a team out that much, but it seems to me that the Blackshirts are fueled by our home field and the noise that the crowd is making. They always seem to put up more effort and are actually having fun while being out there at home.

 
I think home-field advantage is most evident when teams are lacking in confidence. One or two good plays that bring the fans to their feet can inspire players, which can lead to greater effort, which can lead to more good plays, that can lead to the crowd going wild, which can...

In other words, at home there is a greater chance of getting a positive response that will lead to more effort.

But the best teams, the teams with confidence and that buring competitive drive, don't seem to need that - they actually relish going into a hostile environment and taking the crowd out of it. I think that's what's lacking in the players - there aren't enough that have the buring competitive drive to want to impose their will on the crowd.

Generally speaking, though, that's a trait you can't coach into a player - the player was born with it or developed it himself long before he came to college. While it can be argued that Incognito ultimately harmed the team more than he helped, I don't think any one would argue that he was one of those people that wanted to dominate - one of those guys that loved nothing more than to go into an opposing teams stadium, and hear the crowd grow silent.

That, to me, is what's lacking in this team.

 
I think home-field advantage is most evident when teams are lacking in confidence. One or two good plays that bring the fans to their feet can inspire players, which can lead to greater effort, which can lead to more good plays, that can lead to the crowd going wild, which can...
In other words, at home there is a greater chance of getting a positive response that will lead to more effort.

But the best teams, the teams with confidence and that buring competitive drive, don't seem to need that - they actually relish going into a hostile environment and taking the crowd out of it. I think that's what's lacking in the players - there aren't enough that have the buring competitive drive to want to impose their will on the crowd.

Generally speaking, though, that's a trait you can't coach into a player - the player was born with it or developed it himself long before he came to college. While it can be argued that Incognito ultimately harmed the team more than he helped, I don't think any one would argue that he was one of those people that wanted to dominate - one of those guys that loved nothing more than to go into an opposing teams stadium, and hear the crowd grow silent.

That, to me, is what's lacking in this team.
Click to expand...
Thats where we miss a guy like richie. He had the killer instinct. Last year we had bo who could motivate players to run through a brick wall for him and that carries over to the who team, this year we don't have a coach who can do that.

 
Thats where we miss a guy like richie. He had the killer instinct. Last year we had bo who could motivate players to run through a brick wall for him and that carries over to the who team, this year we don't have a coach who can do that.
Click to expand...
Trouble is, coaches can motivate only to a point. Once the players are on the field, that kind of motivation disapears pretty fast. That's why you need a couple of players with that attitude - they're the ones that can jump on the others immediately and lead by example.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top