There's nothing unfair about it. No sport has any right to be the allround best when it comes to athletic ability, nor does that really have any particular value. It's just an estimate of which sports develop the most allround ability, and that's not what makes a sport great or entertaining. Some athletes do simple things extraordinarily well, while other athletes do things that others can't even perform badly, let alone well.
Your link to athletes is backwards. They competed in athletics because it was available and they were good at it, but you can certainly learn to run fast in a different sport so you don't need to be a sprinter first. You'll just become one if you're fast.
Decathlon athletes are certainly likely to be up there in my view, but there's nothing that says that they'll automatically be the best among all sports. From my times seeing athletes from different sports compete against each other in various events I've also seen that I've underestimated the level of athleticism in some sports. For example I of course understood the endurance (both mental and physical) of enduro motorcyclists, but seeing how strong the guy I watched was really surprised me.
You misunderstood what I wrote. I pointed out that it was unfair to examine crossover sporting success to assess overall athletic capability (normally our #1 tool) because many of the events in Athletics are designed to test one extremely specialized niche of athletic capability. This is why I mentioned the number of former NCAA sprinters in the NFL at various positions (chiefly Wide Receiver). This is because those positions in football are glorified sprinters. They're sprinters who have to learn run a pattern and catch a ball. They also have to be able to take a hit and get back up. So of course Track & Field will select for better talent to succeed in that position in the NFL than any other sport or task (outside playing WR itself).
Now, is that the best all-around athlete? No. But Track & Field will utterly dominate this metric. From runners to throwers to leapers: they turn out athletes with excellence in talent who can apply that specific talent to succeed in a million different ways.
Shifting, now, think about boxing. This was #1 in the ESPN analysis for greatest overall athlete. Oh rly? Tell me...when was the last time we had a Bo Jackson, Deion Sanders, Jackie Robinson, or Randy Moss knocking people out in the ring while the world waited on the edge of its seat to hear which of the D1 scholarships he was going to actually take-- Boxing and Basketball/Baseball/Football? Because he could do any of the above at an elite level. Did you know that many consider Jim Brown to be the greatest Lacrosse player to ever play the sport?
The Cliff Notes are that we can, indeed, assess overall athletic talent and prowess in many objective ways. Any objective measurement that we've ever conceived doesn't have soccer players anywhere close to the top. They may be the world's elite sportsmen, but as athletes, they typically just don't measure up.
Indeed, they are. Hmmm. That might explain why I was emphasizing concepts like "bigger" and "stronger" in my previous posts. Bigger matters. Stronger matters.
Soccer players's "bigger, stronger" muscles might also be a compelling argument if they weren't smaller and weaker than the same muscles in those athletes who I've mentioned. The issue here is that soccer players aren't complete enough. I've highlighted their greatest deficiencies:
too small (in terms of absolute or lean mass)
too short & inferior leverage across the gamut except with regard to a lower center of gravity-- i.e. foot turnover/contacts (this includes inferior reach: on both relative and absolute scales)
inferior quickness, acceleration, and top speed versus much larger, longer, and stronger athletes who also excel in aerobic capacities especially on an absolute scale
below average athleticism in one of the 3 major planes of movement-- the vertical plane, regarded to be the 2nd most significant overall-- on an absolute scale (this is a "big idea" in S&C)
lack of any relative athletic excellence in the torso (not complete, overall athletes)
The TS also mentioned "durability". Soccer is far less combative or physically abusive than the two sports as played in the specific sports leagues I've mentioned (NFL, NBA)
I read about that analysis in the papers some years back so I don't have a source of it readily available. Boxing was #1 there as well so it's possible the ESPN thing had some connection to it. As I said it doesn't make it a sure thing, but there were some really knowledgeable and well-educated people doing it so it does have some relevance when the matter is discussed.
I was under the impression that you had reviewed some interesting new analysis from an updated version of the IOC Sports Medicine manuals, or something like that. I was intrigued to see the latest sports science on the more abstruse capabilities like hand/eye coordination.
The ESPN poll was pop garbage. It had no objective value. It was a bunch of boxes for different attributes required to excel in sport rated from 1-10, and they asked a bunch of athletes and sports pundits (this would include guys like Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless) before tallying them up. Not only was this purely subjective, but they treated each column as if it contributed equally to success across sport. It was glorified shit-talking articulated through a spreadsheet. It conveyed nothing of worth.
No. Because it's such a low scoring game, penalty kicks loom in importance far more than they should; because penalty kicks are so valuable, it encourages the worst displays of flopping and playacting seen on a playing field.
Basket ball literally isnt even a sport
Everyone crying about one team having too many good players so them winning the league was a formality lmao
There's no sport there, its just a video game
The reason for this is that the payoff for the other team getting a yellow or red card is very high.
Leaving the other team with 10 players is a huge advantage. So exaggerating contact in the hopes of getting the opponent a card is very enticing.
Plus, the line between a legal defensive move and a brutal foul is razor thin. You can legally and cleanly kick the ball away from an opponent but can also snap his ankle if you misjudge the move and kick the ankle instead of the ball.
Basket ball literally isnt even a sport
Everyone crying about one team having too many good players so them winning the league was a formality lmao
There's no sport there, its just a video game
I havent followed it as much the past few years but overall its my favourite sport. The flopping and diva like behaviour is a huge black mark on it though. I remember in England even as recent as the 90s (well, the earlier part) the game still had a degree of grit. A lot of the pitches were pretty shitty, wages were still semi reasonable and there was an appreciation for hard tackling and disdain for flopping. Then the big money started pouring in and it really transformed things for both good and bad, a decrease in physicality and drastic increase in floppers and pampered sissies being the most noticeable negative side effects.
The reason for this is that the payoff for the other team getting a yellow or red card is very high.
Leaving the other team with 10 players is a huge advantage. So exaggerating contact in the hopes of getting the opponent a card is very enticing.
Plus, the line between a legal defensive move and a brutal foul is razor thin. You can legally and cleanly kick the ball away from an opponent but can also snap his ankle if you misjudge the move and kick the ankle instead of the ball.
Yeah, I dont understand why so many Americans have that perception. I'm from the UK and it has always looked to me like America does its own thing in sports for the most part, and generally have minimal involvement in most of the sports that are popular here. They do well in the Olympics but thats just a given since its a first world country of 300+ million people fielding a large team.
Yeah, I dont understand why so many Americans have that perception. I'm from the UK and it has always looked to me like America does its own thing in sports for the most part, and generally have minimal involvement in most of the sports that are popular here. They do well in the Olympics but thats just a given since its a first world country of 300+ million people fielding a large team.
Americans may be stereotyped as ignorant of all countries and cultures beyond their own. This stereotype shows them as lacking intellectual curiosity, thus making them ignorant of other cultures, places, or lifestyles outside of their own.
Americans may be seen as arrogant people. They are frequently depicted in foreign media as obsessively nationalistic and obnoxiously patriotic, referring to the U.S. as "the greatest country in the world" and patronising people from other countries.
^ I think the evidence of these stereotypes being largely true is there for all to see, and sherdog forums being no exception.
Not trying to slam them too much or call them Americans stupid but even intelligent Americans are comparatively ignorant to anything outside their borders that doesn't directly affect them. It's arrogance more than anything.
It's a tribal thing. Most people don't even care about it but World Cup is an event that pulls people together.
As a spectator sport, it can be boring as hell, so I don't like it but a lot of people seem to enjoy it for some reason.
The reason for this is that the payoff for the other team getting a yellow or red card is very high.
Leaving the other team with 10 players is a huge advantage. So exaggerating contact in the hopes of getting the opponent a card is very enticing.
Plus, the line between a legal defensive move and a brutal foul is razor thin. You can legally and cleanly kick the ball away from an opponent but can also snap his ankle if you misjudge the move and kick the ankle instead of the ball.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
