[jterrell]

Originally Posted by stasheroo

Probably right about that.

But to me it's often used by the guy who has run out of ideas and anything constructive to say. They then hit the smilie 'panic button' and hope that nobody notices that they're in over their heads.



A 'good leader' doesn't mean anything without tangible results either. All the 'intangibles' in the world are meaningless unless they contribute to tangible results.

I have never heard the words 'intangibles' used more often on any player than Tim Tebow. How are all of those intangibles working out for him and the Jets? Ultimately, it's about results. Everything else is just noise.



Agree or disagree, I enjoy intelliegent, spirited debate.

You and I have agreed and disagreed many times, but you always put great efforts into supporting whatever side of the argument you come down on.

I appreciate that.

Only going to disagree about the intangible part.

If you are a good leader, you are a good leader. It doesn't mean everything turns to sunshine around you. While you can often see some tangible evidence it is often of questionable causality. That's why it is an intangible in the first place.

Players who practice hard perform better. A pretty basic idiom but hard to truly validate with evidence over time. And in fact in some cases players may play better without any practice at all but just rest. Lots of variables but a very solid idiom overall.

Tim Tebow's intangibles seemed to work wonders in Florida. But his overall lack of use and the fact he is splitting a fan base could cause a guy with positive intangibles to have a negative impact when in the wrong situation.

Emmitt had great intangibles here until we were sorry and he was calling his teammates poo.

I get drawn offsides into extremes as well. It is a lazier way to debate and requires less thought or work. So it happens to all of us and becomes the norm on the forums. I am going to try and be a value add by steering things back toward the middle where possible.