There's long been a silent-assassin vibe to leadership at the Blues.
It's a club whose most experienced players have tended not to be great orators in the mode of Pericles.
Inspiring speeches have rarely been made by those wearing blue and action not words has been the way in times of trouble.
Look back across the decade and the Blues' most prominent players have responded to pressure physically.
When Keven Mealamu was captain and the Blues needed a game-changing moment or a significant incident to spark them back into life, he'd deliver it with a punishing ball carry.
When Jerome Kaino was around, he'd lift those around him with a thunderous tackle. And Patrick Tuipulotu looks to be much the same.
• Premium - Gregor Paul: New Zealand Rugby's latest blunder in search for ways to revive the game
• Premium - Rugby: Gregor Paul - Ian Foster faces difficult questions around All Blacks selection following opening Super Rugby games
• Premium - Gregor Paul: Why 2020 should be a year of hope and possibility - not doom and gloom - for New Zealand rugby
• Premium - Gregor Paul: The day the All Blacks ceased being 'the people's team'
The current Blues captain gave everything against the Chiefs in the opening game of Super Rugby. He was a brute in the middle of the park, inspiring with his presence and ability to hurt the Chiefs with his power.
It's how things are at the Blues. The answer to a problem is always the same: to run harder, or tackle with more venom.
Chiefs hit hard as three ABs unavailable for derby
Blues suffer huge blow: All Black, two other stars ruled out
England captain 'a broken man' after loss to France
It's not such a bad response, but it is a problem when it is the only way in which leaders are able to respond to pressure.
The game is more complex than that. Teams need a greater range of attributes to find a way to win and if anyone needs any reminding of how dangerous it is to rely solely on an increased physical presence to turn the course of a game, they need only look at the way Ireland were outsmarted by Japan at the World Cup.
Japan applied a mix of speed, skill execution and physicality as well as some clever tactical deployment and deviation to build a lead against the Irish. And once Ireland went behind, they fell into the trap of believing they could smash their way back in front.
Their leaders got horribly lost in that game – failing to come up with any tactical appreciation of what was required. They couldn't see that brain not brawn was required to change their fate and this continues to be the problem that blights the Blues.
They need something other than quiet strong men in their leadership group. They need to be able to pull another lever and support Tuipulotu with a wider range of tactical options.
They lack a towering personality who is making it clear what the next play should be. And sometimes great leadership is simply making sure that the No 10 understands he's to kick the ball the length of the feld the next time he gets it.
That doesn't appear to be happening at the Blues and if they started their opening match with a degree of attacking unpredictability against the Chiefs, they quickly lost it in the second half.
Opposition teams know that the Blues will come at them harder and with more intensity when they are behind.
It is testament to the heart and commitment at the club but so too does it allude to their greatest weakness which is that they become individual and predictable when they are having to fight to stay in the contest.
It's a near certainty that if the Blues are chasing the game, they won't kick. They won't have the patience to see that territory and pressure can create opportunity.
Almost without fail last season, and one game into this, the Blues have shown that in the final quarter of an arm wrestle they carry no element of surprise or tactical manipulation.
Which is in stark contrast to the Crusaders. While the Blues reverted to type at Eden Park, in a sense, so too did the Crusaders the following night when the next generation of leaders such as Jack Goodhue, David Havili, Scott Barrett and Braydon Ennor continually mixed the tactical approach to keep the Waratahs guessing.
When the Waratahs were threatening a mini-comeback mid-way through the second half, the Crusaders responded by playing with more depth to generate more width.
Their plan was to try to create space for Ennor and Will Jordan and it was remarkable for its perception and execution.
When the Waratahs were then left trying to reshape their defence to cope with the new attacking ploy, the Crusaders then mixed things up by driving a lineout and smashing their way to the try-line.
The Crusaders were anything but predictable and while they have their share of players who respond to adversity with an exclusive menu of physicality, they also have players such as Goodhue and Ennor whose minds remain clear enough to kick and pass others into space.