Much depends how far back you go.
As far as I can tell, the idea of a big team was originally an American thing, possibly an invention of need carried over from the Hollywood influences, whereas most of the European greats made their names by going out with the girl and doing their mutual thing. The 'team' concept flies in the face of the creative solo artist, where the fewer the disparate factors at work the greater the chances of getting done that which you wish to do.
In my day, models did their own hair and makeup, the photographer, at most, needed a kid with young muscle to carry the weights and be the one exhausted after the struggle to wherever the location might be. It's nice to have someone to hold steady a lighting stand or reflector out on a windy beach, be first line of defence against cows in a field...
I realise that was a simple way of working, and that today folks need to have computers, people to work the computers, clients, hair, makeup, wardrobe and any number of modern aides to assist the flow of the great man's mind.
Wasn't always the case, and looking at a lot of the contemporary work that graces the pages of mags, less would often have been more.
Perhaps that's why there's less personality around today; that any number of shooters could be thought to have made any particular shot: it is all teamwork, committee photography.
There would never have been a Sarah Moon, a David Bailey nor a Helmut Newton if those people had been forced to work as button pushers.