The selection pressures are a lot higher in running (same as weightlifting).
I reckon the top level sprinters get selected for by the time they're 9-10 years old. And anyone not even close to elite gets told to not bother after that point.
Are top flight footballers better than equivalent athletes from other sports?
- Thread starter BusbyMalone
- Start date
I reckon the top level sprinters get selected for by the time they're 9-10 years old. And anyone not even close to elite gets told to not bother after that point.
Definitely not the same for weightlifting globally. They work seriously hard but if you look at the 4 ladies GB has sent to this years games, 2 of them didn't get into the sport until around early 20s. Same as in the USA, people often pivot into it at a much older age.
However, in some countries (China being number one), they are picking 10 year olds.
I personally know a two time Olympic Bobsledder and I'd say he trains as hard, and has as good a diet, as any top level footballer.
The estimate for how many runners in the world that I could find from 2017 is 621m so that’s about twice as many runners.
There is some sense to the argument I guess, in terms of just sheer natural talent.
But sheer talent is only a part of being an athlete or sportsperson - we see that with the Messi / Ronaldo or Federer / Djokovic debates.
I know 3 lads who have played professional rugby for Munster and 2 who have played for Munster and Ireland and I will say the sacrifices they have made in their lives to reach the level they have, are far and beyond what you see from a lot of footballers.
The sister of a friend of mine represented Ireland in swimming at the Olympics. She had to do her Leaving Cert over 4 years because of the hours she spent in the pool and training each day. The travelling and dedication to her fitness, her nutrition and every minute aspect of her life was incredible to see.
Meanwhile, Wayne Rooney made it pretty damn close to the pinnacle of professional football while eating, drinking, smoking and riding questionable brazzers until the cows came home most weekends.
Gareth Bale plays for Real Madrid, Spurs and Wales at major tournaments, while football merely subsidises his golfing schedule.
So in terms of talent ability I reckon the argument holds up, but not in terms of being a complete athlete.
But sheer talent is only a part of being an athlete or sportsperson - we see that with the Messi / Ronaldo or Federer / Djokovic debates.
I know 3 lads who have played professional rugby for Munster and 2 who have played for Munster and Ireland and I will say the sacrifices they have made in their lives to reach the level they have, are far and beyond what you see from a lot of footballers.
The sister of a friend of mine represented Ireland in swimming at the Olympics. She had to do her Leaving Cert over 4 years because of the hours she spent in the pool and training each day. The travelling and dedication to her fitness, her nutrition and every minute aspect of her life was incredible to see.
Meanwhile, Wayne Rooney made it pretty damn close to the pinnacle of professional football while eating, drinking, smoking and riding questionable brazzers until the cows came home most weekends.
Gareth Bale plays for Real Madrid, Spurs and Wales at major tournaments, while football merely subsidises his golfing schedule.
So in terms of talent ability I reckon the argument holds up, but not in terms of being a complete athlete.
Bit of a difficult comparison which sounds slightly ignorant and needlessly provocative.
A world class gymnast or cyclist is insanely dedicated to their sport and in no way less proficient than a pro footballer. The fact that football is popular doesn't means it's harder than other sports. It's just harder to reach the top, which would be the same if another sport was as popular with as few spots in the top.
Maybe football requires more talent than a lot of other sports, but it definitely doesn't take the amount of physical fitness required for some other sports
A world class gymnast or cyclist is insanely dedicated to their sport and in no way less proficient than a pro footballer. The fact that football is popular doesn't means it's harder than other sports. It's just harder to reach the top, which would be the same if another sport was as popular with as few spots in the top.
Maybe football requires more talent than a lot of other sports, but it definitely doesn't take the amount of physical fitness required for some other sports
Thinking out loud here but I doubt football can draft in players based almost purely on one or 2 physical attributes and see them excel as we've seen in other high level team sports. In that sense it would suggest that a certain base level of pure talent needs to be there to hit the very top. Then compared to for example a tennis player who absolutely has to have the same talent and work rate, you can argue it is less competitive to reach the top? He might be onto something, though i can completely see the argument that he's wrong
Fair enough, you're probably right there - but isn't that why GB and the USA can't really compete against the Chinese, Iran and the old Soviet countries?
They're selecting the guys they want to invest in quite early. I reckon it's fairly easy to tell for a trained eye who has a shot to make it as a top level weightlifter just because proportions are so critical and then there's just raw muscle building potential (wrist sizel/ankle size can be a dead giveaway).
It is the levels in football, so many play in competitive formats, to stand out you have to be very special. As a kid at least 60% of the boys in my different schools played regularly. You don't need extreme physical gifts to be a top footballer, if course it helps but there are plenty of fantastic athletes with poor technique at amateur levels.
Most played sport in the world by far, and it allows a wide range of body shapes to excel if they have the technique. Basketball was mentioned, but an example would be Hakeem Olawjuwan, didn't take up the sport until 17 but is one of the most skilled big men ever. You aren't getting to the top level in football starting that late, too much to learn.
Most played sport in the world by far, and it allows a wide range of body shapes to excel if they have the technique. Basketball was mentioned, but an example would be Hakeem Olawjuwan, didn't take up the sport until 17 but is one of the most skilled big men ever. You aren't getting to the top level in football starting that late, too much to learn.
Part of it has been getting kids into the system early enough, but part of it is that those countries you mentioned systematically dope where as the UK and USA do not (and before anyone says they do, I know many athletes and coaches in both teams, they 100% do not) and also have a much more strict testing policy (in comp and outside of comp) to catch those who try to dope individually.
An improvement in Olympic qualifying for the sport has changed, that so doping is now much difficult, and due to that the UK has a serious chance of at least one, if not two, Olympic medals over the next week and a bit (Sarah Davies and Emily Campbell).
There is a big push to get Weightlifting youth programmes and talent academies moving again, that's because the governing body has finally been given some funding due to a couple of reasons. One is we are more successful now (we've won European medals for the first time in nearly 30 years) and the other is UK Sport moving away from the previously very strict cash for medals policy whereby if you weren't winning, you weren't getting money.
Slightly different question - in terms of team sports, which sport and position has the highest athletic threshold for you to just be able to compete in it at the top level?
Top level being the Olympics or a world cup?
Top level being the Olympics or a world cup?
Does F1 driving count as a sport? The G force pressure alone is insane.
Not competitive running though, surely?
Do you honestly think athletes who participate in the Olympics do not have other competitions in between Olympics?
The Olympic games are a showcase event. Each sport discipline has its World Championship (or equivalent) that is as or more competitive than the Olympics.
Ffs, boxers in the Olympics are amateurs.
It’s saying that participant as a sport but doubt that’s in a competitive capacity but you never know could be counting all those people training for or have done a 5k - Marathon.
Just giving an idea of how many runners there are globally.
That really depends on the sport discipline.
This is obvious isn’t it? Worlds most played sport, very accessible and therefore hardest to reach the top. The rest is just Cox being a bit Michael Cox to make people annoyed where he can easily dismiss them
unless you count things like running which isn’t sport, it’s exercising
unless you count things like running which isn’t sport, it’s exercising
Can you name 5 sports that are exception to that rule?
Professional boxers can compete at the Olympic’s since 2016 but most choose not to.
You should consider that just the Premier League teams have more than 400 footballers in total, and that doesn't include the other top divisions in Spain, Italy, Germany and France (and the list goes on).
It seems a bit ignorant to just assume that footballers are "better" (whatever that means) than their counterparts in other sports.
It seems a bit ignorant to just assume that footballers are "better" (whatever that means) than their counterparts in other sports.
I kind of hate these kind of debates because it's absolutely impossible to quantify. Football is the most popular sport in the world, it's also the most accessible, with the most availability in terms of clubs to sign for at a youth and professional level. How do you even begin to weigh up the difficulty of "making it" in that environment versus say the pressures of making it in an individual sport?
In my case, I played football and tennis to a pretty high level, and I found tennis to be far more competitive. One of my tennis teammates for example was an incredible player, ranked in the Top 20 in the country for his age group. Now consider that to even survive as a tennis player you probably need to be one of the 15 best players in your country at ANY age group. Basically you have to be one of the 15 best players from ages 18-35. If you're even the 10th best 19-year old in Britain, there's basically a 0% chance you're making it as a professional tennis player, now compare that to football?
How do you even compare football to American sports, where you can be the best player in the state at high school level, and you've probably only got like a 2% chance of making it as a professional player in the NFL or NBA?
And I'm not even saying he's wrong. Football is the most played sport in the world so therefore the best footballers are the best athletes in the world is probably a fine take, but it's not the "take" that he thinks it is. And it's this sort of dismissive attitude and his complete ignorance of basically any other sport that is quickly making me realise that Michael Cox is just a bit of an asshole.
In my case, I played football and tennis to a pretty high level, and I found tennis to be far more competitive. One of my tennis teammates for example was an incredible player, ranked in the Top 20 in the country for his age group. Now consider that to even survive as a tennis player you probably need to be one of the 15 best players in your country at ANY age group. Basically you have to be one of the 15 best players from ages 18-35. If you're even the 10th best 19-year old in Britain, there's basically a 0% chance you're making it as a professional tennis player, now compare that to football?
How do you even compare football to American sports, where you can be the best player in the state at high school level, and you've probably only got like a 2% chance of making it as a professional player in the NFL or NBA?
And I'm not even saying he's wrong. Football is the most played sport in the world so therefore the best footballers are the best athletes in the world is probably a fine take, but it's not the "take" that he thinks it is. And it's this sort of dismissive attitude and his complete ignorance of basically any other sport that is quickly making me realise that Michael Cox is just a bit of an asshole.
I can't be having Cox's argument that Messi is better at his sport than Usain Bolt was at his. All 7.5 billion people have had a go at running at some point in their lives. Bolt is unquestionably the fastest man who has ever lived. Lionel Messi is only debatably the greatest footballer ever, in fact some would argue that he isnt even the greatest footballer of his era.
No they have not, babies have not
I did not know that, thanks! The point still stands though.
I don’t understand, apples and oranges…
@the chameleon I don’t think I agree. If you see what type of players coming through at Utd it are usually not the very technical players but the hard working guys. So what I want to say is being skillful is not enough, you have to work work work and then work even harder to get somewhere in sports and that holds up for any sport.
I have also known players who very very skillful but they didn’t make it because their heads were not straight, they thought they had already made it, you have to make that extra effort to get noticed. You have to work yourself knackered at training everyday, you have to live for the sport 24/7. My father had big teams coming to watch him when he was u16 but then he saw a woman whom he chased and football became second plan. He ended up being a factory worker bringing up a useless son (me ;-) ) instead of becoming a topsporter for fame and glory.
@the chameleon I don’t think I agree. If you see what type of players coming through at Utd it are usually not the very technical players but the hard working guys. So what I want to say is being skillful is not enough, you have to work work work and then work even harder to get somewhere in sports and that holds up for any sport.
I have also known players who very very skillful but they didn’t make it because their heads were not straight, they thought they had already made it, you have to make that extra effort to get noticed. You have to work yourself knackered at training everyday, you have to live for the sport 24/7. My father had big teams coming to watch him when he was u16 but then he saw a woman whom he chased and football became second plan. He ended up being a factory worker bringing up a useless son (me ;-) ) instead of becoming a topsporter for fame and glory.
Last edited:
Basketball
Gymnasts embarrass footballers in terms of maximising talent. Not even close Either.
Any sport that has variables, makes the sportsperson well rounded. Not truly expert.
Football is great because perfection is an impossibility. The whole premise is pathetic.
Any sport that has variables, makes the sportsperson well rounded. Not truly expert.
Football is great because perfection is an impossibility. The whole premise is pathetic.
I think many are missing the point getting into the details of different sports.
It's purely mathematics that we can be more confident that Messi is the best footballer on the planet than we can be that someone is the best ski jumper, simply because far more have actually had a go at football.
It's purely mathematics that we can be more confident that Messi is the best footballer on the planet than we can be that someone is the best ski jumper, simply because far more have actually had a go at football.
No. The opposite is true. You have to be close to perfect to make money in many sports. You can be one of the top few million to earn money as a footballer. Football dulls the blade, not sharpen it. We don’t even have adequate systems in place to capture footballers.
Isn't this thread about top flight footballers? That would mean also comparing the level required to make it into a Norwich or Crystal Palace squad compared to the lower end of other sports.
I think it’s fair to say that if top flight footballers had been groomed for another sport from an early age then they would likely be near the top of those sports. They would have the mental strength, dedication and physical gifts to excel at certain sports.
One of the better barometers is if you look at where Britain has invested in Olympic sports and how quickly we have become a medal winning nation. Cycling, Swimming, Gymnastics, Rowing, Sailing etc all saw medal growth when we pumped money into them. That suggests untapped potential hat simply requires participation and investment.
Clearly football in the UK already has those things going for it and as such additional investment in football in the UK isn’t the thing likely to make us World Cup winners. That’s going to need a slice of luck and some once in a generation footballers.
One of the better barometers is if you look at where Britain has invested in Olympic sports and how quickly we have become a medal winning nation. Cycling, Swimming, Gymnastics, Rowing, Sailing etc all saw medal growth when we pumped money into them. That suggests untapped potential hat simply requires participation and investment.
Clearly football in the UK already has those things going for it and as such additional investment in football in the UK isn’t the thing likely to make us World Cup winners. That’s going to need a slice of luck and some once in a generation footballers.
There is still every chance somebody out there had the athletic potential to be better than Bolt. They could have not liked running.
It’s an equipment sport. But the suggestion they’re among the fittest sportsmen is daft. They’re not even athletes.
More chance that someone was better than Messi and couldn’t afford to continue.
Elite Running is more of a level meritocracy than football.
It's all relative. The more competitors in any sport, the harder it is to make it to Norwich level.
Not every sport has as many spots at the top. You don't need to be in the top 1000 footballers in the world to make it into the Norwich squad. For comparison Formula One seems to have just 20 competitors in its top competition, and that's just one example.
Until the United States takes football seriously and their prime athletes play it we won't know if we are seeing the best of the best. I mean their pretty much the best at every other sport so hard to say if football would be any different if they set their mind to it.
If everyone in the world had training and then a trial at Formula one, then how many of those 20 would still have a seat?
You are joking, right? Footballers have a comparatively easy life to most top level sportspeople.
You'll have some others hit similar peaks probably but by pure virtue of the pool of footballers to pick from, being such a global sport, then of course yes it's true. If you have 2 billion people in the world play football and 500 million around the world play American football (numbers out of my ass, just an example), you have to beat a lot more competition comparatively to rise to a professional level let alone the top level, and it's competing with people all around the world compared to just mainly one country for many other sports.
So using simple stats, you'd assume the average top level is much higher, and to have someone reach a top top level in another sport similar to the very best footballers like Messi, it is much lower odds (but still possible and happens). That's why someone like LeBron is so dominant for so long, or Federer. You have similar level greats probably, but much fewer competition.
So using simple stats, you'd assume the average top level is much higher, and to have someone reach a top top level in another sport similar to the very best footballers like Messi, it is much lower odds (but still possible and happens). That's why someone like LeBron is so dominant for so long, or Federer. You have similar level greats probably, but much fewer competition.