Without a doubt in my mind I answered this poll that instincts are more important. Let me explain why.
First of all every one of these guys is already an athlete. Some have freakish skills to do certain things. This is what people are calling ahtleticism.
Instincts are about more than that. Let me give you a couple of examples.
Offensive linemen and for the most part Defensive Linemen are never going to be track stars. They simply aren't the thoroughbreds. Some will argue that they are the power lifters. Okay, fine. Does the ability to lift weights alone make you a football player? No. If it did Brock Lesnar would have made the Minnesota Vikings. There is no doubt the kid has freakish athletic ability. Some will say steroid induced, and that's fine. He did not have the instincts for the game.
Now let's go to the Track Stars. How about Renaldo Nehemiah. Gave football a try and wasn't bad, but he really wasn't good either. This guy was an elite athlete in every sense of the word. He was fast, quick, and a very bright young man. How come he never set the NFL on fire like Bob Hayes did? Quite simply he didn't have the instincts for the game.
Let's look at our new kid on the block, Terrell Owens. Some will point to his physical condition and training and say he is proof that athleticism is a difference maker. I don't agree. Owens is making a similar impact on the game that Michael Irvin did. However, Owens is probably more physically gifted than Michael was. Why has Michael had more team success? Quite simply because he has true understanding of the chemistry of the game. That is the essence of instincts. Stories abound about Michael challenging teammates to play harder than he did that day. He already had the mindset of a champion. All of his athletic ability in the world didn't make him a Champion. His shear determination did. That is instincts.
All the athletic ability in the world can't make you good. Instincts can. The truly great players combine both to become legendary figures. I will always point to Roger Staubach as the perfect example. Was he a superior athlete? Oh hell yeah. When I think of the 5 youthful years he gave up to serve his country it almost makes me cry. He was so spectacular to watch he was almost human poetry. As amazing as his overall skills were, it was his mind for the game that elevated him to the heights he achieved. He simply made the game look easy. That is instincts. The ability to sense something and change the course of the game by overcoming it. Montana had this. Elway had this. Roger exemplified it.
Every player on that field has athleticism. They are athletes already by sheer virtue of what they have done. People talk about Emmitt's vision or his heart. That is instincts. His instincts made him great. He was already an athlete.
Every year there are guys who are freakish athletes that teams take a chance on. For example Mike Mamula of the Eagles. Every year there's a guy who isn't near the athlete Mamula was who keep on playing the game because he has great instincts. Looking at the Cowboys past again the perfect example is Bill Bates. Was he freakishly good like a Ronnie Lott? No, but his instincts kept him in the NFL for a lot of years. Meanwhile a superior athlete like Rod Hill had his career over in the blink of an eye.
The stuff between the ears and the thing beating in the chest are about instincts. They are what separate the athlete from the legend. I don't believe anyone can show me a truly successful football player who is a great athlete, a difference maker on the field, who doesn't have instincts for the game. On the other hand there are dozens of guys making it on guile and heart. That is instincts.
