My feelings are that the narrative of Sam Ehlinger and the real Sam Ehlinger are two very different things. The narrative is that he's this amazing--and I hate this phrase--"leader of men" who motivated his teammates yada yada. TBH I literally never saw this, other than his play on the field at times, which was nothing to sneeze at. He certainly led by example and laid it all on the line physically. But that's just a person that wants to win. And simply wanting to win does not a leader make. All the players want to win. Leadership is something else.
That said, Sam's hate for Herman was palpable and honestly I think it affected his play. He felt hamstrung by the play calling usually from the second series through the last series of the third quarter. This was the same story every damned game. Only in desperation did the handcuffs come off and that was where Ehlinger shined. But the point of leadership is doing it through adversity. And Sam's demeanor, body language, and play--those things we can glean through the television screen, were in my opinion, always pretty bad in during the second act of each game when the play calling became lackluster. The team fed off of Sam's vibe. There was rarely a game over the last four years--and there were exceptions, sure--where Sam and the offense looked engaged for the duration of the game. Defense: different story. They were always engaged whether or not they were getting shelled. I think it's because they had better leaders even when play calling was hindering them. So it's a good comparison. Orlando was an anchor, but those players continued to play their asses off. Herman was an anchor on the offense and the players often phoned it in. Sam included.