philosophical question of the day.......

[Xaiveir]

In sports, everyone seems to describe when a team loses as not having "IT". Ive been trying to break into freelance sports writing, and had afew articles published on the net. Ive been trying to get some articles published on ESPN .com and i wrote an article about "IT" and sent to them, so hopefully here is to getting on espn.com.

My reason for posting this is i would like to hear sports fans take on "IT", what is "IT", how does a team get "IT" , why do some teams never seem to have "IT". Why is "IT" so important? Essentially give me your way of defining "IT".

This is a discussion that me and some friends started afew monday nights ago watching the Seahawks get pasted by the Bears in front of a national audience. We said "man, they just dont seem to have "IT" tonight. We started the discussion, however we were quite drunk and it quickly turned into bickering. Same group of guys last monday watching the Cardinals game and the discussion began again. What is "IT" define it.

I stayed up that night writing the article and submitting it....now the wait is on.

[Tikker]

lesson 1 about being a writer, learn to spell philosophical


"IT", Chemistry, or heart are really hard to define when it comes to something like this. It's hard to explain how some people can win just through sheer will power. Or why a single person can put out such an effort that it inspires everyone else around them. I was a huge Mark Messier fan for years before he guaranteed victory against the Devils in the playoffs.

Much bigger fan after he then scored the hat trick and basically single handedly crushed the Devils that night.

I played on a football team with a guy who was a leader like that. He just simply refused to let the team lose. As long as he was confident, everyone knew that we couldn't possibly lose.

If I could define it 100%, I would make a bajillion bucks teaching people how to get it

[Xaiveir]

Holy shit did i ever butcher that word. Funny thing is i typed it correctly when i wrote my article. The beauty of it being 7 in the morning with no coffee while typing! Editing the word just for you tikker!

Other people weigh in...its an interesting discussion.

[Tikker]

kind of the flip side, is why do certain teams/players choke?

ie, Vanderjagt is by far, the most accurate kicker football has ever seen (nfl or cfl (he's played both leagues too)) yet, misses routine kicks under pressure, where as a guy like Viniatieri nails those

[Xaiveir]

kind of the flip side, is why do certain teams/players choke?

ie, Vanderjagt is by far, the most accurate kicker football has ever seen (nfl or cfl (he's played both leagues too)) yet, misses routine kicks under pressure, where as a guy like Viniatieri nails those

Very true, they lack "IT" even though they have teamates that are capable of "willing" them to win. Example....Arizona Cardinals. Whatever IT is...they dont have it.

[Tikker]

in that game, you could see it starting to happen

the Bears KNEW they could come back and win, and the Cardinals KNEW they could blow it

Back to the football guy I knew, I remember the first season I played with him

We were undefeated, and no one had come remotely close to even competing with us. 1st playoff game, we pair off with the 3rd place team from the other conference, and at half time we're down 21-0

first words out of his mouth were "we have them right where we want them. they'll get cocky now, and we'll be able to dominate the 2nd half and win the game"

everyone believed him 100%, and we ended up winning 35-21, with him scoring 2 tds, throwing for 2 others, and the defense running an INT back for a TD

[Jay]

I think IT is the compilation of everything it takes to win. Like every aspect of the team working in unison towards the victory with the true belief that they will pull through and take the game. IT is the quarterback leading the team and making his plays and being able to break through the other teams defense while the reciever see's his opening, the offensive line holding their ground and the blockers who are nearby ready to support whoever handles the ball. The Bears didn't have IT in Arizona. They had a strong D in the second half. Special teams kicked ass for a bit but the quarterback was faltering and the D buckled in the end. Thankfully, the kick was wide. I saw moments where Grossman was finally getting over his bad play and making good movement downfield but when he got 3 yards from the endzone he lost it because of his unfamiliarity with goal line defense in the NFL. I guess you could say, the Bears D had IT which made them score a 2 defensive touchdowns, but Rex lost his confidence and was trying some ridiculous long passing plays under cover to regain that confidence. Just 1 good play, I think that was on his mind.

[Tikker]

I don't think the bears really had IT at all that game

i think it was more a matter of the Cardinals have a negative amount of IT



(leinart is going to be fantastic tho if they ever get even an adequate Oline)

[Jay]

Now that I think about it you're probably right. Urlacher did what he did because the Cardinals let him do what he does best. Leinart was definately on though.

[Gargamellow]

it=the ability to win

[Xaiveir]

it=the ability to win

I dont think you can just put that simple of a tag on it. For instance in the Arizona/ Bears game you could describe Leinhart as having "IT" however he wound up losing the game.

Also the Cardinals had "IT" for 3 quarters, the announcers, myself and friends said wow they certaily have "IT" going for the tonight. However they lost the game. Did they suddenly lost "IT"?

[Xaiveir]

I don't think the bears really had IT at all that game

i think it was more a matter of the Cardinals have a negative amount of IT



(leinart is going to be fantastic tho if they ever get even an adequate Oline)

Ok what exactly were the Bears missing to make it so they didnt have "IT"? Intensity...motivation....ability to win....confidence?

[Jay]

They came into the game cocky. They probably figured they were going to dismantle the Cardinals. Hell, I figured that. When you play cocky, you don't play your best because you figure you don't need to. Same thing happened to the Bears in 85 against the Eagles. Just so happens, the new QB raped raped them in the first half and they were like ok wtf, let's turn it up. So the answer to that is intensity and motivation. Had they killed the Cardinals, it still would not have been a huge win for them.

[Xaiveir]

Then would this definition describe "IT"?


"IT"
To possess the requisite abilities for something; be talented, adept, or proficient

[Tikker]

The reason I say the Bears didn't have "it" that game was that they didn't win the game


the cardinals lost the game

if you can't see that distinction, we've got issues

[Jay]

Add, despite pressure, ego, or scrutiny.

[Lionking]

I think Tikker is right when he talks about the confidence that his QB had and the confidence that his team had in the QB. That's the biggest IT right there - confidence. I hear it all the time when it comes to the NFL. Most teams are fairly equal at a talent level. What it comes down to is the level of confidence one team has over another. Whether it be confidence in players, coaches, schemes, whatever. You can see it in the body language of the teams. The Bears / Cardinals game was very black and white example of that.

It's like confidence = IT and your chance to win is directly related to how much + or - you are to the baseline.

[Xaiveir]

The reason I say the Bears didn't have "it" that game was that they didn't win the game


the cardinals lost the game

if you can't see that distinction, we've got issues

Ive gotcha...but my question was what did they lack to not have "IT" after having "IT" for the previous 5 games.


I certainly can distinguish between the cards losing the game...not the bears winning. I deffinatly agree with that statement. However my question still remains unanswered sir

[Tikker]

after that first long bomb was dropped, there was never a point in the game where i knew 100% that the bears were going to win(you could feel though that the cards were going to lose)

when a team has "it" everyone can feel it. I dunno what it is, just that when "it" is present, everyone can feel it


Confidence is a big part of "it" but it's not all. it's almost like a religious zealousness that you KNOW you're going to win, that there's not even another option

[Jay]

Having IT is testing your assist button when I'm targeting the Tribunal.

[Xaiveir]

It's like confidence = IT and your chance to win is directly related to how much + or - you are to the baseline.

Ok i agree with you to a point. I think there is more to it than just confidence though. If confidence = IT then why did the bears almost lose that game. They didnt have that "IT" in the first 3 quarters. What was the difference between 3 quarters and the last quarter? Did they lack confidence, or is it they had "IT" the entire time knowing that they would come back and beat Arizona? Was it "IT" that pushed Rakers kick wide left?

[Xaiveir]

Having IT is testing your assist button when I'm targeting the Tribunal.

FU sir. Was hoping you forgot about that. I certainly had "IT" that day!

[Xaiveir]

Some interesting ideas that have come up today. Has actually made my day of work pass by quicker. Would be interested in seeing what Vonkaar and some of the others opinions would be.

Im still trying to hammer out a decisive explanation for "IT". Was trying to define it to someone the other day that is not a big sports fan, and its very very difficult to explain.

[Xaiveir]

Also is "IT" a learned behavior, or or certain people born with inate "IT". Talking about "IT" on an individual level not on a team level now.

[Tikker]

I think some are born with it