12-13-2017, 12:38 PM
I think it depends on your definition of motivate. If you mean getting the adrenaline flowing, frothing-at-the-mouth-ready-to-run-through-a-brick-wall motivation, Marvin is right....not his job. Not at this level. Some of the greatest coaches weren't rah rah guys. Landry, Noll, Belichik, Dungy, Grant, Parcells, were all highly successful, but weren't real motivaters in a rah rah sense. Chuck Noll famously told his team in his first team meeting that if he had to motivate them, then he'll fire them. There was just no room on the roster for anyone that didn't naturally give 100% effort, 100% of the time. That was the standard back then. Even Belichick' s "just do you job" mantra is more old school than new age.
Successful teams also seem to have at least one if not several players that are strong team leaders that the other players respect and rally around.
So I don't think it's the HC's job to individually motivate any player. I do think the head coach's role in that regard is to create a culture on the team where 100% motivation of the player and the team to succeed is the standard. Anything else is unacceptable. That includes stupid and selfish penalties that hurt the team. And you draft players that fit into that culture. Any player that needs their hand held, a personal cheerleader or sideline shrink should be on the next bus out of town. HC's have more important things to do. (Position coaches on the other hand should absolutely get in the faces of their players. He knows their personalities and motivation triggers much better than the HC.)
That said, a coach has to hold up their end also...and that's where the Bengals may fall short. If the players don't believe they're being given the very best opportunity to succeed, it's human nature to have difficulty maintaining self-motivation. Doesn't mean that it's right or acceptable, especially with the money these guys make, but like I said, they have to fight human nature.
There's a reason that some teams can come back and win after being down by 17 at the half, and other teams can come back and lose after being up 17 at the half, and it's not JUST about X's and O's. It's a mindset instilled by the culture of the team that started way back in training camp.
Successful teams also seem to have at least one if not several players that are strong team leaders that the other players respect and rally around.
So I don't think it's the HC's job to individually motivate any player. I do think the head coach's role in that regard is to create a culture on the team where 100% motivation of the player and the team to succeed is the standard. Anything else is unacceptable. That includes stupid and selfish penalties that hurt the team. And you draft players that fit into that culture. Any player that needs their hand held, a personal cheerleader or sideline shrink should be on the next bus out of town. HC's have more important things to do. (Position coaches on the other hand should absolutely get in the faces of their players. He knows their personalities and motivation triggers much better than the HC.)
That said, a coach has to hold up their end also...and that's where the Bengals may fall short. If the players don't believe they're being given the very best opportunity to succeed, it's human nature to have difficulty maintaining self-motivation. Doesn't mean that it's right or acceptable, especially with the money these guys make, but like I said, they have to fight human nature.
There's a reason that some teams can come back and win after being down by 17 at the half, and other teams can come back and lose after being up 17 at the half, and it's not JUST about X's and O's. It's a mindset instilled by the culture of the team that started way back in training camp.
