Post game SB interviews revealed why Ravens are better: chemistry

**steelz09** · 02-05-2013, 10:03 AM

Tomlin is considered to be a great "motivator". This team lacked leadership, lacked motivation, and completely lacked a "sense of urgency". On top of that, they played sloppy football and our HC didn't exactly coach very well either.

The Ravens were better in each of these areas. I don't think the Ravens have a much more (if at all) talented team than us.

**feltdizz** · 02-05-2013, 12:00 PM

..and if Baltimore lost on the last second it would be SF's chemistry, drafting and HC...

Chemistry had nothing to do with it... they made plays when they needed to.

Every time a team wins the SB everyone runs out and says "we need what they have" to win. All I saw was a team who didn't quit, a team who wanted it and never felt like the game was over. We USED to play like that but I think our new crop of players mailed it in or expected magic to happen instead of pushing themselves a little harder.

...and sometimes it's just not your year but this year I think it's a little more than that. GILBERT has no heart and fell on everybody. WALLACE was in lala land... Brown had a few brain farts, Sanders stays dinged up....

and our D can't generate TO's

**lloydroid** · 02-05-2013, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by Ghost

I want ben giving the "Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" speech and the team doesn't stop him because "he's on a roll!"

Fo wheel. He kind of is John Belushi giving that speech, to be honest. I don't think Ben commands respect, due most likely to his actions not resembling his sideline pep speeches. Yes, he is a gamer during games, but is he perceived as a BS'er and goof when not on the field?

**lloydroid** · 02-05-2013, 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by feltdizz

..and if Baltimore lost on the last second it would be SF's chemistry, drafting and HC...

Chemistry had nothing to do with it... they made plays when they needed to.

Every time a team wins the SB everyone runs out and says "we need what they have" to win. All I saw was a team who didn't quit, a team who wanted it and never felt like the game was over. We USED to play like that but I think our new crop of players mailed it in or expected magic to happen instead of pushing themselves a little harder.

...and sometimes it's just not your year but this year I think it's a little more than that. GILBERT has no heart and fell on everybody. WALLACE was in lala land... Brown had a few brain farts, Sanders stays dinged up....

and our D can't generate TO's

And all the things you mentioned as reasons for winning are greatly enhanced with good team chemistry. If you don't realize this, I don't know what to tell you.

**lloydroid** · 02-05-2013, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by steelz09

Tomlin is considered to be a great "motivator". This team lacked leadership, lacked motivation, and completely lacked a "sense of urgency". On top of that, they played sloppy football and our HC didn't exactly coach very well either.

The Ravens were better in each of these areas. I don't think the Ravens have a much more (if at all) talented team than us.

They had team unity going down the stretch. We did not. There are many possible reasons for it, but there is no question this team did not have a good chemistry going.

**lloydroid** · 02-05-2013, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by Chadman

Give you a hint- it has nothing to do with Ben, Wallace, Woodley or Mendenhall.

Oh, on the contrary, when your team leaders are not a unified part of the team, they very much are a big cause of team lacking chemistry. You just know that both Mendenhall and Wallace were griping into teammates ears about how bad the coaching and front office suck and that rubs off and leads to a lack of unity. You don't think so? If you have ever been part of a team (athletic or other) you'd know that a handful of bad apples complaining about things leads to bad chemistry.

**lloydroid** · 02-05-2013, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz

IMO chemistry is the RESULT of success, not the CAUSE of success.

It's easy to "love" each other when you're winning.

Not true. When Pgh made their runs in 2005 and 2008, they experienced a lot of adversity before they found themselves and righted the ship. Chemistry came before success did, to a big degree.

**Sugar** · 02-05-2013, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by lloydroid

Oh, on the contrary, when your team leaders are not a unified part of the team, they very much are a big cause of team lacking chemistry. You just know that both Mendenhall and Wallace were griping into teammates ears about how bad the coaching and front office suck and that rubs off and leads to a lack of unity. You don't think so? If you have ever been part of a team (athletic or other) you'd know that a handful of bad apples complaining about things leads to bad chemistry.

Did you record these conversations when you were in the locker room/practice field hearing these things?