Remember when Tennessee Titans rookie QB Vince Young took over five games into the 2006 season and led his team from 0-5 to an 8-3 finish? That epic turn-around set in stone a faulty reputation for Young that got its roots in college: Young always played well enough to win. Whether in National Championship game against favorite USC, when he combined for 467 yards (200 on the ground) and 3 touchdowns, or during his rookie year winning streak, when he had a paltry 66 quarterback rating, his teams always seemed to end up in the win column.
In short, his actual statistical performances are peripheral to some intangible quality that enables positive results.
Which, of course, is absurd. Whenever individual athletes in team sports are valued based on intangible qualities — “he’s a good locker room guy”; “selfless”; or “sacrifices for the team” — while their actual game tangibles are ignored, its usually a red flag that he’s not all that good.
(Well, at least that’s the case in fantasy sports.)
But Young was different. Dubbed as merely “unpolished”, Young is a physical marvel — built like a defensive back, with a strong arm, running back speed and a marvelous athletic ability.
In college, that was enough. And that reputation appeared to precede him following his rookie year (for which he was named offensive rookie of the year) and even into this year when the Titans got out to 6-2 start.
All along, Young’s stats stunk. This year he’s been even worse — a 2:1 interception to TD ratio and only a slightly higher qb rating of 68.
Supporters shrug their shoulders and say in their best Chris Berman paraphrase: “All he does is win football games.”
Until losing 3 strait and 4 of 5, that is. In those games, Young’s stats were no better or no worse.
Suddenly, the ‘good-enough-to-win’ theory loses all credibility when the team actually loses. Don’t you see the flawed logic in anointing one player as a sole reason for success or failure of his or her team?
As it turns out, Titans defense was one of the best units in football all along and those few points that Young and his offense actually did manage to put up narrowly outpaced the opponents’. Then the Titans lose a few key defensive personnel, and, (not) coincidentally, the Titans begin their losing streak.
The good-enough-to-win theory has been attempted on the other end of the spectrum, as well — by declaring superior talents “losers” of “chokers” because their teams don’t win. Immediate examples that come to mind are Peyton Manning and Alex Rodriguez. Manning, who will arguably retire as the greatest statistical quarterback of all time, proved critics wrong when he was the 2007 Super Bowl MVP. In route he put together his own version of John Elway’s “the drive” to beat the New England Patriots in the American Conference Championships.
And suddenly that makes him good enough? I could name a half-dozen factors that helped the Colts win that game that were completely unrelated to Mannning. But because of one game, Manning was transformed into a heady veteran with championship resolve.
Rodriguez, god willing, will get his rings to match his numbers. I say this both as a Yankee fan and a staunch defender of my theory that players have a lot less value to their team than the media makes them out to have.
whereIstand Tags
