GumboBC

I often hear fans complaining that Aaron Brooks is not a leader and he'll never be one. Considering the quarterback probably has more responsibility than any other player on the team -- I think it's a valid criticism. But, I think some fans place too much emphasis on the value of leadership at he QB position and give too much credit for leadership being responsible for winning games.

Leadership has it's value. But isn't the real question -- How much leadership counts for in terms of wins and losses? Just so we're clear on what the definition of leadership is. The following is defined by Webster's Dictonary as leadership:

LEADER - a person who rules or guides or inspires others.

Obviously, a quarterback doesn't "rule" his team. I think the complaint made by most fans is Aaron Brooks doesn't inspire his team like other quarterbacks do. Again, a fair complaint. But, how much inspiration is required by a quarterback and how much does it count for in terms of wins/losses?

Personally, I think leadership at the QB position is way overrated. If I look back at NFL teams before free-agency, when teams were dynasties, I see no compelling evidence that QB's led their teams to the super bowl because of their intangibles. Here's a list of some great super bowl teams:


XXIV - 1/28/90
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - Notre Dame (33)
John Elway, Denver Broncos - Stanford (29)

XXV - 1/27/91
Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants - West Virginia (29)
Jim Kelly, Buffalo Bills - Miami (FL) (30)

XXVI - 1/26/92
Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins - Washington State (30)
Jim Kelly, Buffalo Bills - Miami (FL) (31)

XXVII - 1/31/93
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - Oklahoma, UCLA (26)
Jim Kelly, Buffalo Bills - Miami (FL) (32)

XXVIII - 1/30/94
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - Oklahoma, UCLA (27)
Jim Kelly, Buffalo Bills - Miami (FL) (33)

XXIX - 1/29/95
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers - BYU (33)
Stan Humphries, San Diego Chargers - NE Louisiana (29)

XXX - 1/28/96
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - Oklahoma, UCLA (29)
Neil O'Donnell, Pittsburgh Steelers - Maryland (29)



What I see is the most talented TEAMS usually made it to the big dance. And, those teams usually had very talented QB's. I think the talent these QB's had was way more responsible for their success than any intangible. Now, grated, some of these teams had great QB's, who were considered great leaders. However, these were simply the best TEAMS and they would have been successful with most anyone playing QB.

People lose sight that this is a team game and it takes a total team effort to be successful. And that is the KEY. For further proof that leadership is overrated. Where is Dan Marino at on this list?? He had all the intangibles anyone could ever want. Marino had all the talent a QB could ever want. Wasn't enough though. His leadership was of little help. As much as he might could inspire his teammates, it just didn't help that much. Like I said -- THIS IS A TEAM GAME -- It takes much more than a talented QB and it definantly takes much more than a QB that possesses great leadership or any intangible.

On the other hand, you had QB's like Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Stan Humphries, and Neil O'Donnell whose teams all went to the super bowl. Why did they make it? Simple. They had great teams. They had players that made plays. I don't think Hostetler inspired Lawrence Taylor or the rest of that defense. They were just a great and talented defense. I don't think Neil O'Donnell, Mark Rypien, or Stan Humphries led their team to the super bowl either. I don't think John Elway's leadership was largely responsible for the Broncos getting to the super bowl either. I think he was just an extremely talented QB that made plays. I'm sure it inspired his teammates, but his ability to make something out of nothing was probably the deciding factor. NOT LEADERSHIP.

So, when I see teams like Carolina make it with Jake Delhomme. Or, Tampa make it with Brad Johnson. Or, the Ravens make it with Trent Dilfer. I see way more compelling evidence that there were other things that were way more responsible than "leadership" at the QB positon that got them there.

So, for those of you that think Jake Delhomme's "leadership" got them to the super bowl. Well, that's an inspiring story. One that I think is far from the truth. And for those of you that think the reason the Saints aren't winning is because of a lack of "leadership from Aaron Brooks. Well, maybe he's just another Dan Marino.