Messi in Miami

[JB7]

Hates on people having favorite players then goes on to talk about his favorite player a few posts later. Top stuff.



To be fair, we might just have a classic case of Florida man. Angry at nothing and everything at the same time, brazen foolishness powered by ignorance or bath salts.

Yeah because supporting a player instead of a club and having a favourite player is the same thing. But then seemingly you went to a game the other night just to watch Messi so no wonder my comment struck a nerve, if the boot fits etc.

Not from Florida at all. You’re incapable of refuting the points so proceed to spout nonsense. All the best.

 

[Zlaatan]

I don’t think any of the posts have been cynical or negative towards Messi directly, rather towards Fort Lauderdale FC. I would suggest it’s somewhat lazy to link a dislike of a football club and the looseness if the rules in their favour being due to their star player. Frankly people who support players rather than clubs shouldn’t be anywhere near the sport - freaks.

It is lazy but not that surprising when every single Ronaldo/Messi fanboy has done just that about a million times on this forum, though for them it obviously goes far beyond just clubs and dodgy refereeing.

 

[Hoof the ball]

Go on then. Issues with either of what you bolded.

The stadium they play at in Ft. Lauderdale is temporary. The stadium under construction and due to be finished by mid-2025 is firmly in Miami itself.

 

[JB7]

The stadium they play at in Ft. Lauderdale is temporary. The stadium under construction and due to be finished by mid-2025 is firmly in Miami itself.

And at that point it would be reasonable to refer to them as "Miami". While they are playing at a stadium they chose to build in Fort Lauderdale it would not (the last Miami team to move to Fort Lauderdale renamed themselves as such afterall). But as I'm sure you and many others would agree, this topic is getting incredibly boring and away from the main conversation piece which is supposed to be Messi himself, so let's leave it there.

 

[Red in STL]

Quite difference being in an entirely different city like an hour away but each to their own.

In the US an hour away is the same as next door, it can easily take an hour to get to one side of a city from the other

Edit: apparently Miami to Ft Lauderdale is 30 miles and 37 mins driving time according to Google maps

 

[Ted Lasso]

Yeah because supporting a player instead of a club and having a favourite player is the same thing. But then seemingly you went to a game the other night just to watch Messi so no wonder my comment struck a nerve, if the boot fits etc.

Not from Florida at all. You’re incapable of refuting the points so proceed to spout nonsense. All the best.

You said you were going to Miami's local rivals games... presuming that's Orlando and unless you're coming in from out of state that makes you a Florida man. If not Orlando then what, Nashville, Atlanta? The latter might make sense - mostly cnut fanbase.

Let's take a step back here a moment and reflect on your Ft Lauderdale comment. You clearly don't know your geography nor the situation so it was absolutely worth being called out on as others have.

The player and team connection you're making is a bit misled as well. The vast majority of new fans coming out to see Miami aren't becoming Miami supporters. They're there literally to see the greatest player in the history of football. If you actually took the stick out your arse and talked to some of them like human beings you'd know that. It's your opinion so whatever. I personally think these marquee signings have helped the league tremendously, ironically, going back to when Beckham signed for LA. With any sport there's always tiers of fans including those who are drawn to star players rather than a team in particular. Nothing wrong with that. There's plenty of fans like yourself to banter with without demeaning or ruining the entertainment and enjoyment of others.

And speaking about me in particular, I try and get to a handful of Union games every season. I don't have the schedule for season tickets otherwise I would, as dire as the league can be. Generally prefer getting to games when we're on a cup run over regular season. That said, I have no shame in being drawn more to this game because of Messi. I was actually also really eager to see if I might spot Beckham, who is also one of my favorite players. You're welcome to dislike that, just the same way I think you're one of those petulant MLS fans that actively pushes new fans away by your exclusive and entitled views.

Whatever the case, feel free to let me know if you're coming to a Union game and I'm happy to cheers over being a couple of cnut United fans

 

[Plastic Evra]

Messi at a press junket basically said he wasn't really enthused to go to Paris, it all happened in a few days and I suppose it boils down to Barca showing him the door at the 25th hour.

 

[JB7]

You said you were going to Miami's local rivals games... presuming that's Orlando and unless you're coming in from out of state that makes you a Florida man. If not Orlando then what, Nashville, Atlanta? The latter might make sense - mostly cnut fanbase.

Let's take a step back here a moment and reflect on your Ft Lauderdale comment. You clearly don't know your geography nor the situation so it was absolutely worth being called out on as others have.

The player and team connection you're making is a bit misled as well. The vast majority of new fans coming out to see Miami aren't becoming Miami supporters. They're there literally to see the greatest player in the history of football. If you actually took the stick out your arse and talked to some of them like human beings you'd know that. It's your opinion so whatever. I personally think these marquee signings have helped the league tremendously, ironically, going back to when Beckham signed for LA. With any sport there's always tiers of fans including those who are drawn to star players rather than a team in particular. Nothing wrong with that. There's plenty of fans like yourself to banter with without demeaning or ruining the entertainment and enjoyment of others.

And speaking about me in particular, I try and get to a handful of Union games every season. I don't have the schedule for season tickets otherwise I would, as dire as the league can be. Generally prefer getting to games when we're on a cup run over regular season. That said, I have no shame in being drawn more to this game because of Messi. I was actually also really eager to see if I might spot Beckham, who is also one of my favorite players. You're welcome to dislike that, just the same way I think you're one of those petulant MLS fans that actively pushes new fans away by your exclusive and entitled views.

Whatever the case, feel free to let me know if you're coming to a Union game and I'm happy to cheers over being a couple of cnut United fans

I'm in the UK, I'm a Manchester United supporter, that's my team that I go & watch week in, week out. I said I watch their local rivals games - that is Orlando yes and I do watch pretty much every Orlando game on TV over here, and usually get over to a two or three games a season, for example I'm heading over for the St Louis game next week and I'll be back out for a play-off game later in the year as long as they qualify.

I do understand the situation and the geography by the way - they built a stadium, in Fort Laurderdale which is a completely different city to Miami, on the same site that Fort Lauderdale Strikers previously played, the most recent incarnation of whom became Fort Lauderdale Strikers after relocating from Miami where they had been called Miami FC. The plan is for their reserves to continue playing there once they move to Miami, and what did they initially call their reserves? Ah yes, Fort Laurderdale. That's why Orlando supporters have generally referred to them as Fort Lauderdale since before they began playing in the MLS. Once they're in Miami, fine, they'll be Miami, until then they just aren't for me so they'll be Fort Lauderdale. The comparison made with Manchester United was frankly ridiculous as Manchester United (or Newton Heath as it was initially) were formed in Manchester, and played in Manchester for 30+ years before the move to Old Trafford, which even then is only a mile or so outside the boundary of Manchester, whereas "Miami" have been formed and quite literally built a stadium over 30 miles away in another city. For completeness, the other poster referred to "Greater Miami" which actually unless I'm mistaken even has an official government office name where Fort Lauderdale is specified. Like I also said on the previous page, there are other reasons I have for disliking Miami the club, such as their attempts to cheat the system upon joining the league and the impact they had on Miami FC who were a very decent side until they essentially stole their fanbase.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that people going to games primarily to watch Messi are either Messi or Miami fans, I totally get that people want to see Messi play; just as I completely understood that United became an even bigger draw to opposition supporters for a period who wanted to see Ronaldo (as were Orlando for a period with Kaka, too but obviously to a much lesser extent). I made a throwaway comment about people who support individual players rather than clubs being weirdos purely in reaction to someone suggesting I was a "bitter Ronaldo fan". Wanting to watch a particular player play is very different to "supporting" a player, which is what a worryingly growing number of people seem to do, so no judgement from me on going to a game to see Messi and/or look for Beckham. I actually agree with you about the marquee signings being great for the league overall, by the way, but ultimately they arrive to play for a team. It baffles me when people essentially support whoever Ronaldo plays for, or Messi or Mbappe etc and then just pick up another clubs shirt to wear when they change clubs, that just doesn't make sense to me and never will as I support the club, and once players are gone they are gone.

Maybe that explains why I'm coming at this from such a different angle, maybe not, happy to agree to disagree if so. Next time I'm in Philadelphia I'd be more than happy to grab a drink, fantastic stadium you've got - I've not actually done a game there yet so it's certainly on the to-do list.

 

[Red in STL]

I'm in the UK, I'm a Manchester United supporter, that's my team that I go & watch week in, week out. I said I watch their local rivals games - that is Orlando yes and I do watch pretty much every Orlando game on TV over here, and usually get over to a two or three games a season, for example I'm heading over for the St Louis game next week and I'll be back out for a play-off game later in the year as long as they qualify.

I do understand the situation and the geography by the way - they built a stadium, in Fort Laurderdale which is a completely different city to Miami, on the same site that Fort Lauderdale Strikers previously played, the most recent incarnation of whom became Fort Lauderdale Strikers after relocating from Miami where they had been called Miami FC. The plan is for their reserves to continue playing there once they move to Miami, and what did they initially call their reserves? Ah yes, Fort Laurderdale. That's why Orlando supporters have generally referred to them as Fort Lauderdale since before they began playing in the MLS. Once they're in Miami, fine, they'll be Miami, until then they just aren't for me so they'll be Fort Lauderdale. The comparison made with Manchester United was frankly ridiculous as Manchester United (or Newton Heath as it was initially) were formed in Manchester, and played in Manchester for 30+ years before the move to Old Trafford, which even then is only a mile or so outside the boundary of Manchester, whereas "Miami" have been formed and quite literally built a stadium over 30 miles away in another city. For completeness, the other poster referred to "Greater Miami" which actually unless I'm mistaken even has an official government office name where Fort Lauderdale is specified. Like I also said on the previous page, there are other reasons I have for disliking Miami the club, such as their attempts to cheat the system upon joining the league and the impact they had on Miami FC who were a very decent side until they essentially stole their fanbase.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that people going to games primarily to watch Messi are either Messi or Miami fans, I totally get that people want to see Messi play; just as I completely understood that United became an even bigger draw to opposition supporters for a period who wanted to see Ronaldo (as were Orlando for a period with Kaka, too but obviously to a much lesser extent). I made a throwaway comment about people who support individual players rather than clubs being weirdos purely in reaction to someone suggesting I was a "bitter Ronaldo fan". Wanting to watch a particular player play is very different to "supporting" a player, which is what a worryingly growing number of people seem to do, so no judgement from me on going to a game to see Messi and/or look for Beckham. I actually agree with you about the marquee signings being great for the league overall, by the way, but ultimately they arrive to play for a team. It baffles me when people essentially support whoever Ronaldo plays for, or Messi or Mbappe etc and then just pick up another clubs shirt to wear when they change clubs, that just doesn't make sense to me and never will as I support the club, and once players are gone they are gone.

Maybe that explains why I'm coming at this from such a different angle, maybe not, happy to agree to disagree if so. Next time I'm in Philadelphia I'd be more than happy to grab a drink, fantastic stadium you've got - I've not actually done a game there yet so it's certainly on the to-do list.

Is the game in Orlando or St Louis?

 

[JB7]

Is the game in Orlando or St Louis?

Orlando, 26/8.

 

[Red in STL]

Orlando, 26/8.

OK because St Louis really isn't worth visiting!

 

[Melvin Udall]

Well that was over 20 years ago. Not doubting he showed his quality, but Gerrard, Lampard and Beckham didnt seem to make headlines. Im not trying to big it up only that it isnt league where a old guy from transferring from can automatically smash it. Rooney didnt. Henry didnt. Its about expectations though. Messi is a few notches above so expectations for him are greater. But seeing him scoring almost 2 goals pr game for the worst team in the league is pure fun.

MLS games are often played in the heat because the league runs through the summer. The general trend has been for attackers, particularly those who don’t rely on pace, to do well, while plenty of midfielders have been more likely to struggle. Robbie Keane and David Villa both did well.

in recent years, though, most clubs have been going away from that, and a lot of the bigger names haven’t been worth it.Toronto has been a mess with Insigne, and Shaqiri has been inconsistent.

 

[JB7]

OK because St Louis really isn't worth visiting!

Can't be any worse than places like Burnley or Norwich where we have to go to watch United

 

[Red in STL]

Can't be any worse than places like Burnley or Norwich where we have to go to watch United

Wanna bet, I've been to both of those and have lived in the St Louis suburbs for more than a decade - I'm originally from Manchester as well, trust me, STL would be very low on your list of desirable places to visit in the US!

 

[JB7]

Wanna bet, I've been to both of those and have lived in the St Louis suburbs for more than a decade - I'm originally from Manchester as well, trust me, STL would be very low on your list of desirable places to visit in the US!

Fair enough - I'll bow to your greater knowledge on that one and possibly swerve St Louis away in future

 

[Red in STL]

Fair enough - I'll bow to your greater knowledge on that one and possibly swerve St Louis away in future

A flying visit for a game is fine, they have a nice new stadium, but anymore than that is not really worth it, there's actually very little in the downtown area, your best bet is to fly in, take the metro to the game and back to the airport and fly out to Chicago or somewhere like that

 

[MrMarcello]

Speaking of playing far from the city name, FC Dallas are in Frisco, some 30 miles north of downtown where they once played in the Cotton Bowl and the club is not even in Dallas County. The club alienated a signficant portion of the fanbase building a stadium so far away from 2/3 of the metroplex. But, hey, white suburbia rules. At least the Cowboys and Rangers put themselves smack dab in the middle of the area.

 

[WI_Red]

Speaking of playing far from the city name, FC Dallas are in Frisco, some 30 miles north of downtown where they once played in the Cotton Bowl and the club is not even in Dallas County. The club alienated a signficant portion of the fanbase building a stadium so far away from 2/3 of the metroplex. But, hey, white suburbia rules. At least the Cowboys and Rangers put themselves smack dab in the middle of the area.

My favorite one of these is that the NY Jets, NY Giants, and NY Red Bull all play in New Jersey. Forget a different city, they are in a different state!

Also, the Angels rebranding as "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" was pretty hilarious.

 

[Red in STL]

Speaking of playing far from the city name, FC Dallas are in Frisco, some 30 miles north of downtown where they once played in the Cotton Bowl and the club is not even in Dallas County. The club alienated a signficant portion of the fanbase building a stadium so far away from 2/3 of the metroplex. But, hey, white suburbia rules. At least the Cowboys and Rangers put themselves smack dab in the middle of the area.

United just played in the stadium used by the New York Jets and Giants, that stadium isn't even in the same state as New York never mind county!

 

[Red in STL]

My favorite one of these is that the NY Jets, NY Giants, and NY Red Bull all play in New Jersey. Forget a different city, they are in a different state!

Also, the Angels rebranding as "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" was pretty hilarious.

Even better would would have been Angels of Disneyland

 

[MrMarcello]

My favorite one of these is that the NY Jets, NY Giants, and NY Red Bull all play in New Jersey. Forget a different city, they are in a different state!

Also, the Angels rebranding as "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" was pretty hilarious.

ESPN Tuesday Morning QB page used to label them appropriate to location, called them Jersey A and Jersey B. He also renamed San Fran to Santa Clara 49ers. Technically, the Cowboys no longer play in Dallas County - they're in Tarrant County.

 

[GinobiliTheGOAT]

Yes, 7 game series and the ease of scoring in comparison to football. If the NBA playoffs were straight knockouts you would get a ton of upsets especially given the variance generated by 3 point contests.

The difficulty of scoring means no guarantee you will win despite playing well, look at Wolves the other night, on balance should have won 3/4-1, come away with nothing.

I love Basketball but football is a far more skilled sport, you simply don't get the likes of Hakeem starting at 18 (literally picking up a ball for the first time) and ending one of the most skilled big men ever in football.

Hakeem is an extreme outlier. In football you have many players who don't play for a proper team until they're 22 or so. Football is also accessible to a lot more people than basketball is.

Now Hakeem is an all time player, but an exteme rarity to start so late and be that good. Only other example is Tim Duncan. And that's for NBA history.



But the number of plays run in a proper basketball game vs a proper football game is light years apart. I think nba players would fare better in football than football players would playing in the NBA.

 

[mshnsh]

Hakeem is an extreme outlier. In football you have many players who don't play for a proper team until they're 22 or so. Football is also accessible to a lot more people than basketball is.

Now Hakeem is an all time player, but an exteme rarity to start so late and be that good. Only other example is Tim Duncan. And that's for NBA history.



But the number of plays run in a proper basketball game vs a proper football game is light years apart. I think nba players would fare better in football than football players would playing in the NBA.

NBA is one league. You are comparing it to a the one truly global sport.

Footballers cover around 6 to 7 miles in 90 minutes in the form of sprints. The average nba player covers 2 miles per game which is the same as that of a goalkeeper. So I doubt your claim that basketball players can complete the average football match. Infact I've played football with students from Canada who also play basketball and they totally accepted that football is much more physically demanding.

Our hands are meant for dexterity which means it's easier to manipulate the ball. On the other hand our feet aren't and therefore the skill level required is definitely higher.

 

[mshnsh]

I’d say dislike rather than hatred, but largely because I’ve been watching their local rivals for over 10 years, travelling over to watch a game or two most seasons and staying up to watch them at whatever time they play week in week out, so there is a level of long-term importance I guess. You could also add that they have been violating the leagues rules since the day they were founded and this will only continue with the latest signings and the league will look the other way due to the publicity that being owned by David Beckham (my favourite player of all time by the way) and having Messi in the team will bring to the league. Also there was already a decent team in Miami and they have basically just trampled them and stolen their fanbase. Apart from that they’re alright I guess.

It's a young league in a country where "soccer" is, strangely, not one of the major sports. Having a player like Messi there will generate interest in the game and inspire new generations to take it up as a profession. This will benefit soccer in America including whatever team you support. There is already sporting culture and financial muscle in place.

 

[GinobiliTheGOAT]

NBA is one league. You are comparing it to a the one truly global sport.

Footballers cover around 6 to 7 miles in 90 minutes in the form of sprints. The average nba player covers 2 miles per game which is the same as that of a goalkeeper. So I doubt your claim that basketball players can complete the average football match. Infact I've played football with students from Canada who also play basketball and they totally accepted that football is much more physically demanding.

Our hands are meant for dexterity which means it's easier to manipulate the ball. On the other hand our feet aren't and therefore the skill level required is definitely higher.

comparing the endurance of an nba player to a GK is ludicrous. There is a lot more standing around in football than basketball where you are constantly racing up and down the court. I don’t doubt football requires more endurance since you are limited to how many subs you can make, but comparing it to GK’s is a very flawed way to look at it.

Put De Gea in an NBA game and he’d be run ragged within 10 minutes.

Having said that, I agree that it’s harder to be elite with your feet than with your hands. But my initial argument was the cerebral aspect and the amount of plays per game run at the top level of basketball outweighs the top level at football.

 

[mshnsh]

comparing the endurance of an nba player to a GK is ludicrous. There is a lot more standing around in football than basketball where you are constantly racing up and down the court. I don’t doubt football requires more endurance since you are limited to how many subs you can make, but comparing it to GK’s is a very flawed way to look at it.

Put De Gea in an NBA game and he’d be run ragged within 10 minutes.

Having said that, I agree that it’s harder to be elite with your feet than with your hands. But my initial argument was the cerebral aspect and the amount of plays per game run at the top level of basketball outweighs the top level at football.

Not true.

For distance covered:
https://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/a20805366/the-distance-run-per-game-in-various-sports/
The average distance covered in football far exceeds everything out there.

There is greater spatial awareness, understanding of the game (football iq) and vision requires in football than in basketball. There have many physicality strong and fast athletes in football, but many do not excel because they lack the football iq as example Ben Arfa. He can dribble well, run fast but what he lacks is a "football brain" hence the failure to reach the absolute top. You can also compare C. Ronaldo before he turned 21 to the version after that.

 

[JB7]

It's a young league in a country where "soccer" is, strangely, not one of the major sports. Having a player like Messi there will generate interest in the game and inspire new generations to take it up as a profession. This will benefit soccer in America including whatever team you support. There is already sporting culture and financial muscle in place.

Have I said any of that is untrue? Seems like you’ve replied to a post I didn’t make pal

 

[Redplane]

I really fail to see how footie is more physically demanding than basketball overall. Distance ran stats have very little relevance to me there.

No player in basketball is a lot more static than another and the short sprints back and forth and frequent jumping in a relatively warm indoor environment is extremely taxing on the joints etc. The physical contact aspect also seems overlooked. I have played both sports at a relatively decent local club level and I appreciated getting subbed in basketball so much more. Not to mention almost all my sporting related injuries came from that, including several broken bones, torn muscles, etc.

Footie of course is demanding as well, but I far less wall to wall kind of way. Now if you d compare indoor footie to basketball Id sah that is a lot better comparison.All IMHO of course.

 

[Red in STL]

I really fail to see how footie is more physically demanding than basketball overall. Distance ran stats have very little relevance to me there.

No player in basketball is a lot more static than another and the short sprints back and forth and frequent jumping in a relatively warm indoor environment is extremely taxing on the joints etc. The physical contact aspect also seems overlooked. I have played both sports at a relatively decent local club level and I appreciated getting subbed in basketball so much more. Not to mention almost all my sporting related injuries came from that, including several broken bones, torn muscles, etc.

Footie of course is demanding as well, but I far less wall to wall kind of way. Now if you d compare indoor footie to basketball Id sah that is a lot better comparison.All IMHO of course.

How many basketball players are on the court the entire game? I'm not really a fan but don't they rotate off and on so essentially get a breather?

 

[mshnsh]

Have I said any of that is untrue? Seems like you’ve replied to a post I didn’t make pal

You seem quite bitter in every single post with rude replies like this one. Your life must really suck

 

[Šjor Bepo]

A bit off topic but watched this game recently and he just turned on the God mode, unreal.

 

[GinobiliTheGOAT]

Not true.

For distance covered:
https://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/a20805366/the-distance-run-per-game-in-various-sports/
The average distance covered in football far exceeds everything out there.

There is greater spatial awareness, understanding of the game (football iq) and vision requires in football than in basketball. There have many physicality strong and fast athletes in football, but many do not excel because they lack the football iq as example Ben Arfa. He can dribble well, run fast but what he lacks is a "football brain" hence the failure to reach the absolute top. You can also compare C. Ronaldo before he turned 21 to the version after that.

You singled out GK's initially which is wrong, and they are standing in one spot for most of the match, not racing up and down a court. And basketball has far far more plays being run than football. tons of players don't cut in the NBA because they can't remember the more in depth plays. Teams like the San Antonio Spurs had over 40 plays for the playoffs back in their heyday.

 

[GinobiliTheGOAT]

How many basketball players are on the court the entire game? I'm not really a fan but don't they rotate off and on so essentially get a breather?

Yes they do, but they would be destroyed if basketball was 90 minutes with just 3 subs, there is no standing around in basketball

 

[lolok]

How many basketball players are on the court the entire game? I'm not really a fan but don't they rotate off and on so essentially get a breather?

They need breathers because it's more intense. Same thing in hockey-- what is an average shift? 45 seconds? No one can tell me that footballers are better athletes than the top NBA and NHL players. I bet all of the top athletes in football, hockey, basketball all test about the same in terms of athletic ability. It's just different sports, and they need different types of stamina. Like comparing Usain Bolt vs marathon runners. Different sports require different levels of speed/endurance.

As someone who played both basketball and football, basketball was more mentally draining than football. I played point guard and it was all action, all of the time. The mentally draining aspect was defending the other teams point guard, bc if I took a split second off mentally-- that guy goes right past me for an easy bucket or an assist. I had to be locked on 100% of the time. In football-- there are always times where you can take breathers and lose focus for a bit and be alright. Outside of getting kicked in the ankle, which sucks, basketball was always more physical. Going up against 240 lbs (109 KG) players who throw elbows on every rebound, or getting absolutely drilled everytime I went to the rack was much more taxing then getting elbowed by a 150 lbs football player.

The other point is-- certain positions in basketball and football require less effort. Messi can walk through games and still be a stud. Scholes wasn't exactly much of a runner at 38 years old. I do give credit to the guys who make about 50 sprints per game--- they are tremendous athletes.

 

[mshnsh]

They need breathers because it's more intense. Same thing in hockey-- what is an average shift? 45 seconds? No one can tell me that footballers are better athletes than the top NBA and NHL players. I bet all of the top athletes in football, hockey, basketball all test about the same in terms of athletic ability. It's just different sports, and they need different types of stamina. Like comparing Usain Bolt vs marathon runners. Different sports require different levels of speed/endurance.

As someone who played both basketball and football, basketball was more mentally draining than football. I played point guard and it was all action, all of the time. The mentally draining aspect was defending the other teams point guard, bc if I took a split second off mentally-- that guy goes right past me for an easy bucket or an assist. I had to be locked on 100% of the time. In football-- there are always times where you can take breathers and lose focus for a bit and be alright. Outside of getting kicked in the ankle, which sucks, basketball was always more physical. Going up against 240 lbs (109 KG) players who throw elbows on every rebound, or getting absolutely drilled everytime I went to the rack was much more taxing then getting elbowed by a 150 lbs football player.

The other point is-- certain positions in basketball and football require less effort. Messi can walk through games and still be a stud. Scholes wasn't exactly much of a runner at 38 years old. I do give credit to the guys who make about 50 sprints per game--- they are tremendous athletes.

That is because in football, the brain matters as much as the running. You can run and run yet remain mediocre. On the other hand, basketballers in nba are all 7 feet giants with huge biceps and deltoids without which they would not survive.

 

[JB7]

You seem quite bitter in every single post with rude replies like this one. Your life must really suck

What a weird post. You didn’t respond to anything I said, I pointed it out, you cry about it. Have a nice day

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Having said that, I agree that it’s harder to be elite with your feet than with your hands. But my initial argument was the cerebral aspect and the amount of plays per game run at the top level of basketball outweighs the top level at football.

Jesus Christ, basketball players are most walking, jogging or standing still. The explosive moments are the athletic marker and they’re truly impressive.

Marking something as cerebral when it’s played mostly at jogging speed, on a court the size of a penalty box is a bit mad.

Basketball is a great sport. I love it. But the players are only athletic at Basketball. Get a basketball player and a footballer to compete in say the top 20-50 Olympic sports and the football is winning most, if not all of them.

 

[mshnsh]

comparing the endurance of an nba player to a GK is ludicrous. There is a lot more standing around in football than basketball where you are constantly racing up and down the court. I don’t doubt football requires more endurance since you are limited to how many subs you can make, but comparing it to GK’s is a very flawed way to look at it.

Put De Gea in an NBA game and he’d be run ragged within 10 minutes.

Having said that, I agree that it’s harder to be elite with your feet than with your hands. But my initial argument was the cerebral aspect and the amount of plays per game run at the top level of basketball outweighs the top level at football.

I compared the total distance run not the type of running.

Basketball players also stand and walk quite a bit in every 15 minute quarter especially when probing to score or when defending. Than consider the 4 breaks as opposed to 1 in a standard football game. I'm not saying the NB players are fat unfit slobs but at the highest level, having watched both sports, I find it hard to believe that basketball is more physically demanding than football.

Secondly, when it comes to cerebral aspect, it really is a no brainer. Basketball is 7 feet giants going from one end to the other and shooting in the net from distance or dunking it in with a quick move. In football, there is alot more strategy and without a football brain (ie understanding the game, having the vision with and without the ball, being able to make the right decisions) , no player can reach the top regardless of physical attributes. There are countless examples of players who were quite fast but did not become top players and there are those who are quite slow yet world class.

 

[GinobiliTheGOAT]

I compared the total distance run not the type of running.

Basketball players also stand and walk quite a bit in every 15 minute quarter especially when probing to score or when defending. Than consider the 4 breaks as opposed to 1 in a standard football game. I'm not saying the NB players are fat unfit slobs but at the highest level, having watched both sports, I find it hard to believe that basketball is more physically demanding than football.

Secondly, when it comes to cerebral aspect, it really is a no brainer. Basketball is 7 feet giants going from one end to the other and shooting in the net from distance or dunking it in with a quick move. In football, there is alot more strategy and without a football brain (ie understanding the game, having the vision with and without the ball, being able to make the right decisions) , no player can reach the top regardless of physical attributes. There are countless examples of players who were quite fast but did not become top players and there are those who are quite slow yet world class.

Completely wrong. At the NBA, yes you have fast breaks much like you get counter attacks in football, but it is incredibly simple to say “it’s just running and dunking and everyone is 7 feet tall”.
Basketball runs FAR more plays than football. Inarguably. The top teams have many many plays, more than football does per match.

I don’t disagree that football can require more skill, but basketball definitely requires a higher iq at the highest level. Hence why you can get jammy results all the time and have a team made up of dentists beat the English national team. That would never ever happen in basketball.

 

[padr81]

The average NBA player runs less than 5k per match, the average footballer double that.

Footballers run the most by quite a distance.
https://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/a20805366/the-distance-run-per-game-in-various-sports/