Biggest Upset Ever... U.S.A Beats Spain 2-0!!

Off Topic
181

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Yes, that was clearly what I was getting at, 8-year old soccer.

My point is that, compared to the other major sports, football is more predicated on raw size and athleticism. Thus, the statement, “you only need to be big,” is obviously untrue but is closer to being true than it is in other sports, with the possible exception of basketball.

There is a continuum with sports like powerlifting or track and field (where the skill demands are low and the physical demands are high) on one end and a sport like golf (where the skill demands are high but the physical demands are low) on the other. I would say football lies closer to the “physical” end of the spectrum than, for example, baseball.[/quote]

But it’s still wrong. It may somewhat be true for lineman, but that’s less than half the players on the field. The further you move from the line of scrimmage, position-wise, the less size is important.

Additionally, if we keep with the lineman there’s a hell of lot more than just size needed. There’s a lot of speed components necessary. Hell, there are lineman weighing over 300 pounds running sub-5.0 40’s.

The thing is, with football, there is no pigeon-holing. Saying something like, “For football, all you need is size” is beyond stupid. Each position needs it’s own specific skill set. Even among lineman, there are different needs for different positions. And not a single position requires only size to be successful.

182

[quote]Nikiforos wrote:
While it is true he is exaggerating, how many athletes would be able to even contemplate a crossover to pro soccer in Europe coming from a different pro sport background? None. [/quote]

Same goes for any sport at the professional level…Michael Jordan coldn’t cross over…who else couldn’t? Basically no one could…Bo Jackson and Deion (right?) crossed over baseball and football…

At the elite pro level, there’s basically a thousand to maybe 2 thousand guys in the entire world that can compete at any given point in time in the particular sport…the odds of one of them being able to crossover is insane…

Your point is silly.

183

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Andy63477 wrote:
For American football, you just need to be big.

You lose all credibility with this statement.

Really? Maybe not at the pro level, but any non-fatass who is 6’2"+ and 280+ and has decent coordination will be a monster in the high school level.[/quote]

First of all, by saying that you need to have decent coordination and decent bodyfat you are already saying there is more to it than “just being big.”

Also, at our football team camp this year there was a guy who met those requirements. We’re talking 6’6, probably pushing 300 pounds, not even that fat, and had pretty good coordination. However, in pass rushing drills, we had three different guys go against him, and all three beat him. Why? Because he was soft and didn’t use good technique. The closest any of our guys were to meeting those requirements was about 40 pounds.

Like has been already been mentioned there are more than just lineman on the field. Out of 22 starters on offense and defense, only 8 or 9 of them are lineman. That’s not even counting special teams, which are dominated by non-“just big” guys. So in the end, that sentence was flat out wrong.

184

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Yes, that was clearly what I was getting at, 8-year old soccer.[/quote]

Oh, that’s dumb. Why are we talking about 8-year old soccer?!?!

It isn’t like you just wake up one day weighing 280. We have plenty of people on this site who want nothing else than to be that size, have dedicated many years to training for nothing other than that, and yet still have a ways to go. You’re much more likely to be one of the fastest guys without much training than to be one of the biggest and strongest. Not only is it not right that you just need to be big, it’s not even close to right. Just ask Bauer what it’s like to be a D1 lineman. Saying you just need to be big for football is like saying you just need to kick a ball around to be good at soccer.

185

The sport that you play the large majority of your life in, is what you will most likely have a talent for. This doesn’t make you any less “athletic” in other sports. American football and soccer at the professional level cannot be compared realistically.

The training for both is different and both have different emphasis. The physical aspect of American Football is being extremely underrated when compared to soccer, where acting is more required than physicality.

As far as big guys in football, the era of big pudgy slow guys is over. Nowadays, you have HUGE guys who can run very fast 40 yr dash times and have amazing overall athleticism. When I played in 1994, our new defensive tackle fresh out of high school was 6’5 and 310 lbs, and could 360 dunk a basketball on a regulation rim with ease.

Soccer advocates will say that they can run circles around football players. Football players will say that they will knock you so hard you won’t wake up in the next zip code. You just can’t compare these two IMO.

186

[quote]Eielson wrote:
jtrinsey wrote:
Yes, that was clearly what I was getting at, 8-year old soccer.

Oh, that’s dumb. Why are we talking about 8-year old soccer?!?!

My point is that, compared to the other major sports, football is more predicated on raw size and athleticism. Thus, the statement, “you only need to be big,” is obviously untrue but is closer to being true than it is in other sports, with the possible exception of basketball.

It isn’t like you just wake up one day weighing 280. We have plenty of people on this site who want nothing else than to be that size, have dedicated many years to training for nothing other than that, and yet still have a ways to go. You’re much more likely to be one of the fastest guys without much training than to be one of the biggest and strongest. Not only is it not right that you just need to be big, it’s not even close to right. Just ask Bauer what it’s like to be a D1 lineman. Saying you just need to be big for football is like saying you just need to kick a ball around to be good at soccer.[/quote]

As I clarified, my point was:

[quote]
There is a continuum with sports like powerlifting or track and field (where the skill demands are low and the physical demands are high) on one end and a sport like golf (where the skill demands are high but the physical demands are low) on the other. I would say football lies closer to the “physical” end of the spectrum than, for example, baseball.[/quote]

I didn’t say that guys who are incredible athletes don’t work hard or are stumbling around blindfolded around the field. What I am saying is this:

In all sports, there is a certain capacity for raw athletic prowess, such as size and speed, to allow one to be a better player than an inferior physical specimen who has better technique. This is more true in football than any other major sport with the exception of perhaps basketball.

And I am pretty sure that Bauer, while he may not agree in sentiment or even for the most part, with what I am saying, can think of at least one example of a Penn State lineman who wasn’t particularly “skilled” but succeeded because of overwhelming physical gifts. Look on their team right now; Navarro Bowman is constantly making poor reads and, from scouting reports an also casual observation, doesn’t seem to be super technically-sound. However, the dude has freakish athleticism for his size and that makes up for a lot… because of that he’s likely to be a first-day draft pick when he comes out.

187

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Eielson wrote:
jtrinsey wrote:
Yes, that was clearly what I was getting at, 8-year old soccer.

Oh, that’s dumb. Why are we talking about 8-year old soccer?!?!

My point is that, compared to the other major sports, football is more predicated on raw size and athleticism. Thus, the statement, “you only need to be big,” is obviously untrue but is closer to being true than it is in other sports, with the possible exception of basketball.

It isn’t like you just wake up one day weighing 280. We have plenty of people on this site who want nothing else than to be that size, have dedicated many years to training for nothing other than that, and yet still have a ways to go. You’re much more likely to be one of the fastest guys without much training than to be one of the biggest and strongest. Not only is it not right that you just need to be big, it’s not even close to right. Just ask Bauer what it’s like to be a D1 lineman. Saying you just need to be big for football is like saying you just need to kick a ball around to be good at soccer.

As I clarified, my point was:

There is a continuum with sports like powerlifting or track and field (where the skill demands are low and the physical demands are high) on one end and a sport like golf (where the skill demands are high but the physical demands are low) on the other. I would say football lies closer to the “physical” end of the spectrum than, for example, baseball.

I didn’t say that guys who are incredible athletes don’t work hard or are stumbling around blindfolded around the field. What I am saying is this:

In all sports, there is a certain capacity for raw athletic prowess, such as size and speed, to allow one to be a better player than an inferior physical specimen who has better technique. This is more true in football than any other major sport with the exception of perhaps basketball.[/quote]

While I agree with what you are saying, you’re changing the argument. This is what started it.

Andy63477 says: For American football, you just need to be big.

Malonetd says: You lose all credibility with this statement.

It wasn’t about if athleticism matters. It was about if all you need in football is size.

This is talking about freakish athleticism and isn’t even really about size anymore. He’s what, 230 pounds?

188

Alright sure, you win. As I said before, I’m not sure the point I was even trying to make in the first place and it’s really not worth arguing so much any more.

191

[quote]pushharder wrote:
sen say wrote:
…I played jv and v football in high school (87 MD State Champs, word)and during the season we’d do static stretching for a warmup followed by learning the game plan for the week’s game and then 10 minutes of conditioning at the end of practice…

I played jv and v football in high school under an ex-Marine drill sergeant who insisted above all else that our team would never be out-conditioned by another team! We may not have been able to execute well enough but we were never gonna die on the field. Maybe that’s why your team went to state and we never got close?

Sheeiit, I remember well those days in May, August and September in south Florida with all its heat and humidity. This was in the 70s when idiot coaches like ours still believed in limiting water intake until after practice just to toughen us up. It never occurred to those bozos that our practice performance, and thus consequently our game performance, suffered severely from being so dehydrated. I’ve often dreamed of meeting my old coach nowadays so I could smack him upside the head and ask him why he stupidly tortured all us boys. He’d grind us into the turf with his practices (no problem there) but not allow us to drink fluids during practice. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.[/quote]

Its funny how you write this, I went through a very similar experience. I had coaches who thought depriving you of water in the extreme heat and humidity was good for you. I remember how we were supposed to concentrate to get through dehydration, I swear I couldn’t focus on anything other than drinking a lake’s worth of water. Today, not many coaches will risk trouble like that with everyone looking to sue.

192

[quote]sen say wrote:
Nikiforos wrote:
While it is true he is exaggerating, how many athletes would be able to even contemplate a crossover to pro soccer in Europe coming from a different pro sport background? None.

Same goes for any sport at the professional level…Michael Jordan coldn’t cross over…who else couldn’t? Basically no one could…Bo Jackson and Deion (right?) crossed over baseball and football…

At the elite pro level, there’s basically a thousand to maybe 2 thousand guys in the entire world that can compete at any given point in time in the particular sport…the odds of one of them being able to crossover is insane…

Your point is silly.[/quote]

In isolation it may seem silly, and perhaps I didn’t word it very well. If you look at the entire post, you will see that I was arguing in terms of how early in age and specific the specialisation is for soccer players and how important that specialisation is. That’s all. :slight_smile: I am sure no “late bloomer” athlete can make a succesful crossover into any highly paid pro team sports, but that small percentage for some sports is even smaller for soccer due to the necessity of that early age specialisation.

193

[quote]pushharder wrote:
sen say wrote:
…I played jv and v football in high school (87 MD State Champs, word)and during the season we’d do static stretching for a warmup followed by learning the game plan for the week’s game and then 10 minutes of conditioning at the end of practice…

I played jv and v football in high school under an ex-Marine drill sergeant who insisted above all else that our team would never be out-conditioned by another team! We may not have been able to execute well enough but we were never gonna die on the field. Maybe that’s why your team went to state and we never got close?

Sheeiit, I remember well those days in May, August and September in south Florida with all its heat and humidity. This was in the 70s when idiot coaches like ours still believed in limiting water intake until after practice just to toughen us up. It never occurred to those bozos that our practice performance, and thus consequently our game performance, suffered severely from being so dehydrated. I’ve often dreamed of meeting my old coach nowadays so I could smack him upside the head and ask him why he stupidly tortured all us boys. He’d grind us into the turf with his practices (no problem there) but not allow us to drink fluids during practice. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.[/quote]

I still had teachers with that attitude a decade later when I was in High School

194

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
I still had teachers with that attitude a decade later when I was in High School[/quote]

It’s funny, I was talking to a Div I college coach over the weekend and he said they never take water breaks because the players can step off the field anytime they need to and get water…he explained very rarely is his practice interrupted by this as the players are primarily there to learn to play…they know their bodies need water and they’ll get the water when they need it.

His training sessions take about 60 to 90 minutes, so about the same amount of time as a game…

195

[quote]pushharder wrote:
We’d hit a lot in pre-season practice…

You just answered your own question.

[/quote]

Coach Hickes used to run 28 sweep 3 or 4 times in a row when I was lined up at left end on jv just to watch Brian Johnson pancake me on the lead block every, single, stinking, time…Coach confessed this to me at my 20th reunion…I could see the humor in it.