I Hate Mondays: Execution and Talent

As Al Pacino once told us from a 1999 hit movie, "On any given Sunday, you're gonna win or you're gonna lose."

That football related quote seems very John Madden-esque and assuming we're temporarily forgetting about ties, it simply states the obvious.

The real question is what separates the winners from the losers, and furthermore, what separates the champions from the runners-up?

The greatest misconception in the NFL seems to be that the key ingredient is talent. Assemble the fastest, smartest, and most athletic players and you're bound to be a favorite.

While watching the big game with a group of colleagues, the general consensus was that the Super Bowl XL champion Pittsburgh Steelers are not the most talented team and are therefore not an impressive titleholder.

Somebody declared that the Indianapolis Colts were a better unit this year and were better suited to win it all.

If you compare the two teams player by player, the Colts are superior on an individual basis at most positions.

If you were an expansion franchise, would you rather start with Ben Roethlisberger or Peyton Manning at quarterback? How about Edgerrin James or Willie Parker as your go-to running back?

But this perception that the more talented team should win is not new and it is not accurate.

But it does sound familiar.

It's commonly used when fans or even pundits observe the New England Patriots. Remember when they won Super Bowl XXXVI, their first of three in four years?

The St. Louis Rams were the Greatest Show on Turf with Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk, Torry Holt, and Isaac Bruce, while the Patriots were, well ... less talented. Tom Brady, Antowain Smith, David Patten, and Troy Brown just didn't appear as sexy, but they still triumphed.

The Steelers, in a way, are similar. They are not pound-for-pound the most talented team in the NFL. Hines Ward may never lead the league in receiving yards and Willie Parker may never transcend the standards of a running back.

But lucky for the Steelers, that is not what wins football games.

Sure, you need players who can play, but you don't necessarily need Michael Vick or LaDainian Tomlinson.

Don't get me wrong, the Steelers of 2005-06 are by no means a nameless squad. They have several elite players, but the real difference that, in the end, separated them from the other 31 teams was execution. In the Super Bowl, that fact was magnified.

The Seattle Seahawks dominated the first half in every statistical category except for the one that mattered. Even after the Steelers took an 11-point lead, the Seahawks quickly battled back and looked to ready to regain control as they were driving in for a score down by just four points.

There is no question that they had their share of opportunities, but they did not take advantage of their openings.

They missed two field goals, they committed more penalties (particularly at inopportune times), and they only converted 29% of their third-downs.

Meanwhile, the Steelers were able to force the Seahawks' offense off the field as the game progressed, they kept their penalties to a minimum, and they were able to convert third-downs (53%), especially in the latter stages.

And that was the difference.

On the football field and in life — if you allow me to be metaphoric for a minute — sheer talent can only take you so far. As a matter of fact, talent is quite often wasted and talented people are outperformed by motivated people. But the ability to combine perseverance, execution, and talent, that is what separates the champions from the runners-up.

Execution and talent mix like Mondays and me.

"Talent is cheaper than table salt. What separates the talented individual from the successful one is a lot of hard work." — Stephen King