Dele 'Muhammad' Alli | Walker takes the finger from Dele | FIFA open disciplinary proceedings

[GlastonSpur]

... but players always end up realising their talent?

You seem to think talent exists only in the present tense (incorrect) and potential exists in the future tense (correct) whereas in reality you can use both, easily, to gauge how good a player will become in the future. Talent is not immediately related to the present like you seem to think it is. You're either being incredibly thick (likely) or on a WUM (also likely) if you think talent and potential aren't practically very similar minus a few small differences when it comes to how good a player can become in the future.

it doesn't matter if you think there's more to potential than talent, they're still related, that is fact that you admitted to yourself and therefore you are being contradictory by using two very similar comparisons and arguing the complete opposite for them.

I don't really care about the Pogba v Alli debate, never said anything about it in here, don't plan to.

No I don't think that talent exists only in the present tense - it can obviously be improved over time. Whether it is improved over time depends partly on a player's character and dedication to hard work and practice. Improvement also depends on the quality of coaching, the help of players around them and remaining free of lots of injuries.

So I strongly disagree with your claim that talent and potential are "practically very similar minus a few small differences when it comes to how good a player can become in the future."

And that's not even mentioning physical attributes, including the fact that the pace of physical development can vary enormously across a mix of young players: sometimes a 17 year-old can look great, really talented, amongst a group of the similar-aged players, when that can be down mainly to the fact that they've developed physically very quickly. And then a few years later, many of the other players have caught up and the player in question suddenly doesn't look so great after all.

 

[GlastonSpur]

So based on a handful of premier league games etc, you believe Alli has the potential to be the best CM in the world?

This is a red herring. I'm simply saying that Alli shows more potential than did Pogba at the same age. This is indisputable IMO: the stats, the performances, the accomplishments all show it.

 

[Cassidy]

This is a red herring. I'm simply saying that Alli shows more potential than did Pogba at the same age. This is indisputable IMO: the stats, the performances, the accomplishments all show it.

I don't see that Pogba has more potential than Alli, because Alli has done more and shown more than did Pogba at the same age.

Maybe you should go back and edit your post, as that is not how it reads.

 

[Cina]

This is a red herring. I'm simply saying that Alli shows more potential than did Pogba at the same age. This is indisputable IMO: the stats, the performances, the accomplishments all show it.

So you're happy to agree that Martial shows more potential than Kane at 19, right?

No I don't think that talent exists only in the present tense - it can obviously be improved over time. Whether it is improved over time depends partly on a player's character and dedication to hard work and practice. Improvement also depends on the quality of coaching, the help of players around them and remaining free of lots of injuries.

So I strongly disagree with your claim that talent and potential are "practically very similar minus a few small differences when it comes to how good a player can become in the future."

And that's not even mentioning physical attributes, including the fact that the pace of physical development can vary enormously across a mix of young players: sometimes a 17 year-old can look great, really talented, amongst a group of the similar-aged players, when that can be down mainly to the fact that they've developed physically very quickly. And then a few years later, many of the other players have caught up and the player in question suddenly doesn't look so great after all.

You keep saying talent explicitly can be improved, as if it's an attribute just like strength and pace, how is that the case? 'Talent' is a measure of future ability just like potential is. That's why we always talk about the most 'talented' young players in the world. How good a player currently is is not how talented a player is. Talent won't improve when the player gets better. The player will get better to realise their talent, much like they'll get better to realise their potential. Surely you can see that?

 

[GlastonSpur]

There's just really no reply that can do justice to the absurdity of that opinion. Pogba was a pivotal player in a team that was one game away from winning a treble, Alli's had a few good games in the Premier League. Pull your pants back up please, there is a reason Pogba was chased by various big clubs in the summer and will sell for more than treble whatever Spurs could sell Alli for. Your logic is the equivalent of me saying Sterling has more potential than Neymar because Sterling proved himself (in a big league) at a younger age than Neymar did. When there's such a big gap between players, the few years difference becomes immaterial.

Not at the age of 19 he wasn't. And besides, now you are dragging other players - the surrounding team - into the mix.

I'm sure Pogba would sell for far more than Alli in the summer, but then you are comparing over a three-year age gap in proven development ... which is absurd.

Your Sterling analogy doesn't hold water ... not least because Neymar at the same age didn't have the opportunity to play in a big league.

 

[Cassidy]

Not at the age of 19 he wasn't. And besides, now you are dragging other players - the surrounding team - into the mix.

I'm sure Pogba would sell for far more than Alli in the summer, but then you are comparing over a three-year age gap in proven development ... which is absurd.

Your Sterling analogy doesn't hold water ... not least because Neymar at the same age didn't have the opportunity to play in a big league.

TBH Neither did Pogba.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Maybe you should go back and edit your post, as that is not how it reads.

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. Pogba has so far realised more of his potential than Alli, but then he's had 3 more years in which to do so. This doesn't mean that Pogba had more potential to start with. I don't see that he did (or does) ... and in fact the evidence so far, when comparing him to Pogba at age 19, is that Alli holds the greater potential.

 

[GlastonSpur]

So you're happy to agree that Martial shows more potential than Kane at 19, right?

You keep saying talent explicitly can be improved, as if it's an attribute just like strength and pace, how is that the case? 'Talent' is a measure of future ability just like potential is. That's why we always talk about the most 'talented' young players in the world. How good a player currently is is not how talented a player is. Talent won't improve when the player gets better. The player will get better to realise their talent, much like they'll get better to realise their potential. Surely you can see that?

Yes, Martial shows more potential than Kane did at 19.

Of course talent can be improved. You're tying yourself in knots: only a few posts ago you said that talent does NOT exist only in the present tense. Was Eriksen as good at taking free kicks when he was 17? No, it's a talent he's worked on and improved.

Yes, talent is a measure of future potential, but it's only part of that measure - I've already listed some of the other factors involved.

 

[BobbyManc]

Not at the age of 19 he wasn't. And besides, now you are dragging other players - the surrounding team - into the mix.

I'm sure Pogba would sell for far more than Alli in the summer, but then you are comparing over a three-year age gap in proven development ... which is absurd.

Your Sterling analogy doesn't hold water ... not least because Neymar at the same age didn't have the opportunity to play in a big league.

Yeah but I can guarantee you I will not be in a position to say the same about Alli when he is 21. If Alli has more potential than Pogba, as you believe, and is three years younger, then the difference in value should not be as big as it currently is. The reason it is is because Pogba is simply incomparable to Alli in terms of ability right now, and statements such as Alli has more potential than him are stupid and counter-productive.

My Sterling analogy does not hold water, correct, because it's founded on similar logic to what you're using in your posts.

 

[gza the genius]

You can't just say that because Pogba didn't play for United at 19 that Alli has more potential either. If Pogba was in this Spurs team at 19 he'd have been playing as well. Instead he was at United in a contract stand off. The very next year he started a ton of games at Juve, did he just suddenly get way better going from 19 to 20?

 

[amolbhatia50k]

You can't just say that because Pogba didn't play for United at 19 that Alli has more potential either. If Pogba was in this Spurs team at 19 he'd have been playing as well. Instead he was at United in a contract stand off. The very next year he started a ton of games at Juve, did he just suddenly get way better going from 19 to 20?

It's a daft and illogical way way of looking at things. As per that view, Deli Ali has more potential than Paul Scholes who made his debut just before turning 20.

 

[Cina]

Yes, Martial shows more potential than Kane did at 19.

Of course talent can be improved. You're tying yourself in knots: only a few posts ago you said that talent does NOT exist only in the present tense. Was Eriksen as good at taking free kicks when he was 17? No, it's a talent he's worked on and improved.

Yes, talent is a measure of future potential, but it's only part of that measure - I've already listed some of the other factors involved.

No I'm not. I've said throughout that talent is a barometer, like potential, to how good a player can become. Eriksen used his talent to become a better free kick taker. He hasn't suddenly become more talented. How can you become more talented? That makes no sense.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Yeah but I can guarantee you I will not be in a position to say the same about Alli when he is 21. If Alli has more potential than Pogba, as you believe, and is three years younger, then the difference in value should not be as big as it currently is. The reason it is is because Pogba is simply incomparable to Alli in terms of ability right now, and statements such as Alli has more potential than him are stupid and counter-productive.

My Sterling analogy does not hold water, correct, because it's founded on similar logic to what you're using in your posts.

You don't know what Alli's value will be in the summer. Besides, at the young ages we're talking about in both cases, it's not as if Alli being younger means that his value is boosted by a greater percentage as compared to Pogba. And Pogba has had 3 more years in which to demonstrate his abilities - so of course his sale value is much higher.

Yes, Pogba is a better player right now, but that's got nothing to do with the question of comparative potential.

 

[Shiva87]

That 3-week injury breaking career really broke him. Very few players have ever come back from being 3 weeks sidelined.

Yes, I know it was three weeks. But he was not the same player after that. It's not only about the physical injury. In his case, I think it was more physcological. Taking a tackle like that at a young age can change the way you play.

 

[GlastonSpur]

No I'm not. I've said throughout that talent is a barometer, like potential, to how good a player can become. Eriksen used his talent to become a better free kick taker. He hasn't suddenly become more talented. How can you become more talented? That makes no sense.

You really don't get it do you. Talent is not an inter-changeable term with "potential". Talent is a part of potential - and I've already cited some of the other component parts.

Eriksen used practice and hard work - and no doubt coaching advice - to become a better free-kick taker. He already had some natural talent in that area and now he's improved upon that talent.

Your crazy to say that talent can't be improved. A right-footed player might be useless with their left-foot - but if they practice hard at changing this then they will get better and develop at least some small left-footed talent.

Talent at least partly involves skills and skills can be developed.

 

[m1y2]

Pogba is a level above in terms of potential.

pogba at 19 was much behind alli, lets wait how the latter progresses, three years is plenty of time. POgba now is three years older..

 

[Cina]

You really don't get it do you. Talent is not an inter-changeable term with "potential". Talent is a part of potential - and I've already cited some of the other component parts.

Eriksen used practice and hard work - and no doubt coaching advice - to become a better free-kick taker. He already had some natural talent in that area and now he's improved upon that talent.

Your crazy to say that talent can't be improved. A right-footed player might be useless with their left-foot - but if they practice hard at changing this then they will get better and develop at least some small left-footed talent.

Talent at least partly involves skills and skills can be developed.

Yeah I'm the one who doesn't get it, obviously. You keep trying to twist my words and make out like I've said things I haven't.

What you're describing there is improving their ability, not talent, if you can't see that talent isn't something you improve then that's fine. Its something a footballer has that you can use to assess how good they can become. This is clearly going nowhere and I'm not going to keep going in circles. You contradicted yourself and everything since then has been nonsense.

 

[Duafc]

talent
ˈtalənt/
noun

1. natural aptitude or skill. "he possesses more talent than any other player"

synonyms: flair, aptitude, facility, gift, knack, technique, touch, bent, ability, expertise, capacity, power, faculty;


potential
pə(ʊ)ˈtɛnʃ(ə)l/
adjective

1. 1.
   having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
   "a campaign to woo potential customers"
   synonyms: possible, likely, prospective, future, probable, budding, in the making; More
   

noun

1. 1.
   latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.
   "a young broadcaster with great potential"
   synonyms: possibilities, potentiality, prospects; More

 

[sincher]

I think Pogba is more skilful than Alli, but Alli is considerably better defensively. Both have the tools to be top class. Pogba is further on that journey, obviously. While Dier is promising as a holding mid, his potential is not at the same level IMO.

Very pleasing to see Pochettino go with Dier and Alli, and for Hodgson to see the potential in that partnership. Very good for England that Alli made the move to Spurs.

 

[Cina]

talent
ˈtalənt/
noun

1. natural aptitude or skill. "he possesses more talent than any other player"

synonyms: flair, aptitude, facility, gift, knack, technique, touch, bent, ability, expertise, capacity, power, faculty;


potential
pə(ʊ)ˈtɛnʃ(ə)l/
adjective

1. 1.
   having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
   "a campaign to woo potential customers"
   synonyms: possible, likely, prospective, future, probable, budding, in the making; More

noun

1. 1.
   latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.
   "a young broadcaster with great potential"
   synonyms: possibilities, potentiality, prospects; More

Well clearly the dictionary is wrong because as Glaston has educated us, you can improve on natural aptitude and skill.

 

[Bestie07]

This thread should be renamed to talent vs potential.

 

[londonredmaniac]

It should be named 'Just when you thought Glaston couldn't possibly talk anymore complete shite...He manages it.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Well clearly the dictionary is wrong because as Glaston has educated us, you can improve on natural aptitude and skill.

So Kane has not improved upon his natural aptitude and skills since he turned 17? And a concert pianist has not improved upon the natural aptitude and skills they had aged 11?

 

[gza the genius]

So Kane has not improved upon his natural aptitude and skills since he turned 17? And a concert pianist has not improved upon the natural aptitude and skills they had aged 11?

The key is the word "natural", the talent is already there. What he improved was likely his technique, he didn't get more talented he just has a better application of that talent now.

 

[ADJUDICATOR]

pogba at 19 was much behind alli, lets wait how the latter progresses, three years is plenty of time. POgba now is three years older..

I'd be utterly astounded if Alli was as highly rated a player, as Pogba is now, in three years time.

 

[Sarni]

So Kane has not improved upon his natural aptitude and skills since he turned 17? And a concert pianist has not improved upon the natural aptitude and skills they had aged 11?

He improved his ability, not his talent.

 

[PickledRed]

He improved his ability, not his talent.

Who cares? Talent is overrated. Hard work, application and an understanding that potential is boundless are way more important. Ronaldo is evidence of that - very interesting account of this in Alistair Campbell's Winners.

Lots and lots of studies and extensive writing on this.

Malcolm Gladwell, Dan Pink, Carol Dweck have all testified how talent isn't primary in achieving great things.

http://gladwell.com/the-talent-myth/

 

[jb8521]

As I've said, Alli is 3 years younger than Pogba. He's shown at least as much potential as did Pogba at that age: the latter didn't get a senior France cap until he was older than Alli and made just 3 Prem appearances for United. In contrast, Alli already has 4 England senior caps and 1 goal, plus 10 Prem appearances and 2 goals ... not to mention outstanding performances against both City and Arsenal.

Your stats are from the wrong year, when Pogba was the age Alli is now he was already at Juventus and had played around 10 games for them and he made his France debut a few months later. If you're going to include Alli's appearances from this season then you should include Pogba's from 2012/13 as well

 

[NinjaFletch]

This is the stupidest discussion in the history of the Caf.

 

[ADJUDICATOR]

Who cares? Talent is overrated. Hard work, application and an understanding that potential is boundless are way more important. Ronaldo is evidence of that - very interesting account of this in Alistair Campbell's Winners.

Lots and lots of studies and extensive writing on this.

Malcolm Gladwell, Dan Pink, Carol Dweck have all testified how talent isn't primary in achieving great things.

http://gladwell.com/the-talent-myth/

Cristiano Ronaldo was talented, so he definitely isn't evidence of that notion.

 

[Minimalist]

Who cares? Talent is overrated. Hard work, application and an understanding that potential is boundless are way more important. Ronaldo is evidence of that - very interesting account of this in Alistair Campbell's Winners.

Lots and lots of studies and extensive writing on this.

Malcolm Gladwell, Dan Pink, Carol Dweck have all testified how talent isn't primary in achieving great things.

http://gladwell.com/the-talent-myth/

Gladwell is continually debunked. He's not a proper researcher or scientist. He's a decent writer/speaker and that's enough to make an impact.

I'd say 80-90% of top athletes have genetic (natural talent) advantages over the rest of society. A very small amount of them get there purely on the basis of 'working hard'.

 

[GlastonSpur]

He improved his ability, not his talent.

I see. So talent doesn't relate to ability or skills. In which case, there's not much left in this bizarre definition of "talent".

 

[PickledRed]

Cristiano Ronaldo was talented, so he definitely isn't evidence of that notion.

At the risk of sounding an arse I've done extensive research on this due to my work and Ronaldo is very much evidence that talent isn't primary. Simply pointing out that he's talented doesn't refute this.

In Alistair Cambell's book, Winners, there's a fascinating story about when Campbell went to the United training ground. Talking to a coach, he got chatting about the two stars of the side, Rooney and Ronaldo. The coach informed Campbell that both players were fantastic but Ronaldo would go on to be a world class superstar and Rooney will just remain very good. When asked to explain, the coach pointed to Ronaldo's application and mindset. He never accepted he was good enough while Rooney was content with his lot - he'd 'made it'.

The point here is that talent has a finite level; it takes you only so far. But hard work and a 'growth mindset' are far more powerful in being a winner. Carol Dweck, in her brilliant book, Mindset, gives a string of examples about hard work trumping talent - Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods being the most famous examples. These guys are superstars because if their dedication. Others with equivalent talent don't achieve the same outcomes because they don't work as hard.

I can't recommend these authors enough - they're at the cutting edge of education, training and sport. You can bet that the top coaches on board.

 

[PickledRed]

Gladwell is continually debunked. He's not a proper researcher or scientist. He's a decent writer/speaker and that's enough to make an impact.

I'd say 80-90% of top athletes have genetic (natural talent) advantages over the rest of society. A very small amount of them get there purely on the basis of 'working hard'.

Say what you like about Gladwell but Dweck's work is world renowned.

As for the bolded section, that's a straw man. I have never suggested that success comes about purely on the basis of hard work. I'm suggesting that talented people are distinguished by levels of application.

 

[Minimalist]

At the risk of sounding an arse I've done extensive research on this due to my work and Ronaldo is very much evidence that talent isn't primary. Simply pointing out that he's talented doesn't refute this.

In Alistair Cambell's book, Winners, there's a fascinating story about when Campbell went to the United training ground. Talking to a coach, he got chatting about the two stars of the side, Rooney and Ronaldo. The coach informed Campbell that both players were fantastic but Ronaldo would go on to be a world class superstar and Rooney will just remain very good. When asked to explain, the coach pointed to Ronaldo's application and mindset. He never accepted he was good enough while Rooney was content with his lot - he'd 'made it'.

The point here is that talent has a finite level; it takes you only so far. But hard work and a 'growth mindset' are far more powerful in being a winner. Carol Dweck, in her brilliant book, Mindset, gives a string of examples about hard work trumping talent - Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods being the most famous examples. These guys are superstars because if their dedication. Others with equivalent talent don't achieve the same outcomes because they don't work as hard.

I can't recommend these authors enough - they're at the cutting edge of education, training and sport. You can bet that the top coaches on board.

Well that's just bollocks isn't it.

Does Lionel Messi just 'want it' more than Ronaldo? No, he's just flat out the most talented player we ever seen.

Hard work and being disciplined can make a difference (I'd argue it's a small difference most of the time) but plenty of talented players (Rooney included) have defied that and still turned out near the top of their trade, even if they never became 'the man'.

 

[Sarni]

I see. So talent doesn't relate to ability or skills. In which case, there's not much left in this bizarre definition of "talent".

Talent is talent, ability is ability. Two different things.

When everyone else has different definition of talent than you, it's not everyone else who is 'bizarre'.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Talent is talent, ability is ability. Two different things.

When everyone else has different definition of talent than you, it's not everyone else who is 'bizarre'.

So what's left if you exclude skills and ability from "talent"? Twinkly eyes perhaps? Or maybe the fact that a player briefly wore a United shirt? Do tell.

 

[Still ill]

Well that's just bollocks isn't it.

Does Lionel Messi just 'want it' more than Ronaldo? No, he's just flat out the most talented player we ever seen.

Hard work and being disciplined can make a difference (I'd argue it's a small difference most of the time) but plenty of talented players (Rooney included) have defied that and still turned out near the top of their trade, even if they never became 'the man'.

What a bizarre argument. Pick any sport, any great you want and the best are the hardest workers. Messi, Ronaldo have allied ferocious dedication to their exceptional talents to become what they are. The world of football is littered with the shadows of hugely talented youngsters that didn't put in the effort. Hard work is a pre-requisite. Of course it is.

 

[PickledRed]

Well that's just bollocks isn't it.

Does Lionel Messi just 'want it' more than Ronaldo? No, he's just flat out the most talented player we ever seen.

Hard work and being disciplined can make a difference (I'd argue it's a small difference most of the time) but plenty of talented players (Rooney included) have defied that and still turned out near the top of their trade, even if they never became 'the man'.

Thanks for the feedback.

Interesting that you identify a Barcelona player to debunk my argument. A club famous for applying excruciating attention to the most basic of skills with their daily rondo drill. Why do the planet's best set of players do something so rudimentary every day? Because that's what makes the difference - even for Messi.

Again, on a general point, you've missed the nuance of my argument. I'm not arguing that we could all make it if we worked hard or even that all professionals could achieve the same high levels of performance. However, there's no doubt that hard work and ambition to achieve real mastery (Ronaldo) - see Dan Pink - are far more important than you are suggesting. In fact, I think Dweck would regard you as having a fixed mindset...that's possibly the rudest thing I've ever said to anyone on here.

 

[Minimalist]

What a bizarre argument. Pick any sport, any great you want and the best are the hardest workers. Messi, Ronaldo have allied ferocious dedication to their exceptional talents to become what they are. The world of football is littered with the shadows of hugely talented youngsters that didn't put in the effort. Hard work is a pre-requisite. Of course it is.

Speaking of bizarre arguments...

Yeah, loads of pre-hyped youngsters don't kick on because they just don't put in the effort. What about the ones who do put in the effort but everyone eventually realises (like the Theo Walcott's of this world) that they're just a bit limited.

It's bollocks. Talent is the difference 90% of the time - it's logical. If a 19 year old could play like Lionel Messi on the pitch, it wouldn't fecking matter how 'hard' he worked in training.