- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I know it’s cliche, but our best athletes would dominate Soccer.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 7:42 pm to WestCoastAg
Posted on 7/7/26 at 7:42 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
also love how everyone making the point that funneling our best athletes into soccer would make a difference have to bang our heads against the wall, to the point that it's aneurysm enducing, that we do not believe we can simply take 11 NBA or NFL players and throw them out on the soccer field and expect to be successful yet yall still just do nothing but throw this out there time and time again to the point where it has to be a bit
One guy literally said you could take Bo Jackson at 14 and make him a superstar in soccer.
Do you think you could do that with basketball? Football, yes. But basketball is so much more than raw athleticism. And soccer, because it’s feet and body and no hands, is even more difficult. We use our hands everyday so learning to manipulate a ball with them is way fricking easier than learning to manipulate a ball with your feet or knee or chest or head.
Soccer relies so much more on skill than raw athleticism it is silly to argue you can out-athlete other world class teams to win a World Cup.
Ask Ghana
1
Posted on 7/7/26 at 7:44 pm to WestCoastAg
I’m still trying to figure out how the frick MetArl countered his own argument
Pure technical skill I guess
Pure technical skill I guess
Posted on 7/7/26 at 7:44 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:
Soccer relies so much more on skill than raw athleticism
Posted on 7/7/26 at 8:29 pm to MetArl15
quote:
the training and culture improved to compete with the best of Europe, then Russell Westbrook vs Weston McKennie might matter
Bingo.
I would also add that even with the exact same level of training I bet Ed Reed would be better thhan Tim Ream at defending.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 8:32 pm to Sun God
I am clearly late to the thread here and didn’t initially read it all before posting. Caught up finally and realized every point had been made and rehashed.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 10:10 pm to WestCoastAg
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:51 pm to _Hurricane_
That’s such BS and just stupid. You think those guys aren’t our “best athletes”? Moron. It takes a lot more than just being a big, fast, athlete. What you really mean is let’s just get a whole team of brothas like Bron Bron out there. I’ll say it again..moron.
Posted on 7/8/26 at 5:32 am to WestCoastAg
I can throw some more gas on this thread and bring up how the typical American pro athlete is much more advanced mentally (both in terms of analyzing/reading their game and the lack of fragility) compared to our best soccer players.
Posted on 7/8/26 at 6:09 am to MetArl15
quote:I disagree. Look, being a great athlete is about more than *just* raw athletic ability. When I say our best athletes play football and basketball, I don’t just mean the guys with the most raw athletic ability. I mean our best sports ball players are playing football and basketball. These are guys who have a natural inclination to be good at sports. Whatever is in their genetic makeup to have a knack for being good at athletic competitions with a ball.
I think the argument is that having prime Russell Westbrook out there last night instead of Weston McKennie or prime Ed Reed instead of Tim Ream would still have resulted in a 4-1 loss even if Westbrook and Reed started playing soccer at the same age as McKennie and Ream.
So yes, I believe 100% that Ed Reed would be a much better defender than Tim Ream ever was even with the exact same coaching.
Posted on 7/8/26 at 6:53 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
I believe 100% that Ed Reed would be a much better defender than Tim Ream ever was even with the exact same coaching.
Does Reed have a natural inclination for a sick first touch? Or control with pace?
He’s actually probably one of the worst examples to use for this argument as the things that actually made him a great (IQ, preparation, and vision) aren’t a function of raw athleticism
He wasn’t an INT freak because he used athleticism to beat people to the ball, it’s because he was the best in the history of the game at baiting throws and was phenomenal at reading QBs. He wasn’t an incredible returner because he was fast or a freak athlete, his speed was actually below-average for a safety. The picks he housed were on the back of spatial awareness and IQ. Go back and watch them if you’ve forgotten. You’re not seeing a sick athlete blow by. You’re watching methodical trodding through chaos knowing exactly where to weave on the path of least resistance
That spacial awareness and IQ would be helpful in soccer. But you’d be going outside of athleticism and that’s the whole point of this debate
This post was edited on 7/8/26 at 7:28 am
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:11 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
He’s actually probably one of the worst examples to use for this argument as the things that actually made him a legend (IQ, vision, and preparation) aren’t a function of athleticism. His return excellence was a function of the same skillset, certainly not his below average speed
So you do believe there are athletes with the characteristics that make up a great soccer player that aren't playing soccer. Interesting.
Its almost like he would be a more athletic version of Tim Ream.
This post was edited on 7/8/26 at 7:13 am
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:22 am to Tiger in NY
quote:There’s many characteristics that go into being a great soccer player. Some can be held by pure “athletes”. Some can also be missing
So you do believe there are athletes with the characteristics that make up a great soccer player that aren't playing soccer
This thread is focused on how the focal characteristics of pure athleticism don’t translate to soccer (admittedly a fact that for some reason just isn’t sinking in for far too many)
This post was edited on 7/8/26 at 7:25 am
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:28 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
This thread is focused on how the focal characteristics of pure athleticism don’t translate to soccer
See this is just not true.
This is the same irrational limitation saying LBJ would have physical deficiencies because he's tall, ignoring his freakshow athleticism allows him to do all the physical things at his size (Which is why he's special)
2 players with the same skill/technical level having different size or athleticism (or both) changes their value as players.
There are 2 digression arguments sprouting to try to counter this truth:
1. The strawman that the discussion is taking athletic 15+ year olds from traditional American sports and then training them in soccer
2. The dishonest argument that you made above, creating this limitation created by the physical attributes being discussed
Very few people on your side of the argument responded to this post. I'm curious why:
quote:
Our current skill level/ability with NBA size and athleticism would transform the team and be something soccer has never seen. Would it put us past Spain/France consistently? Probably not, but we'd probably get into that next tier.
The defense alone would be unfathomable. Imagine a bunch of 6-6, stronger versions of Ream/Richards and faster/stronger FBs than Dest/Robinson....and probably a 7-ft + keeper with a massive wingspan and faster-twitch muscles. In front of them would be a faster/stronger Tyler Adams that is 6-4 or taller, instead of 5-9.
Literally take our guys and their skills/flaws and just make them the "NBA athleticism" (with a haircut for the aerobic/anaerobic issues I discussed earlier) version.
They are arguing THAT wouldn't be a scary arse team.
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:I don’t need the most disingenuous poster in this board’s history to tell me what is or isn’t true
See this is just not true.
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:30 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
disingenuous
quote:
RemouladeSawce
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:31 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
I don’t need the most disingenuous poster in this board’s history to tell me what is or isn’t true
quote:
Our current skill level/ability with NBA size and athleticism would transform the team and be something soccer has never seen. Would it put us past Spain/France consistently? Probably not, but we'd probably get into that next tier.
The defense alone would be unfathomable. Imagine a bunch of 6-6, stronger versions of Ream/Richards and faster/stronger FBs than Dest/Robinson....and probably a 7-ft + keeper with a massive wingspan and faster-twitch muscles. In front of them would be a faster/stronger Tyler Adams that is 6-4 or taller, instead of 5-9.
Literally take our guys and their skills/flaws and just make them the "NBA athleticism" (with a haircut for the aerobic/anaerobic issues I discussed earlier) version.
They are arguing THAT wouldn't be a scary arse team.
You dodged this again
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:32 am to WestCoastAg
We're about to be told soccer doesn't permit 6-4+ players in technical positions while 2 teams remaining have played 6-5 midfielders all tournament 
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:39 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
This thread is focused on how the focal characteristics of pure athleticism d
No, it didnt. You soccer guys came in and tried to imply that. The argument was always "how good would US soccer be if it were America's #1 supported sport"?
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:44 am to Tiger in NY
This right here is just mind-numbing
It makes no sense.
Very few, if any, teams intentionally put slow players at winger or fullback
quote:
the focal characteristics of pure athleticism don’t translate to soccer
It makes no sense.
Very few, if any, teams intentionally put slow players at winger or fullback
Posted on 7/8/26 at 7:45 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:Did you read what I said at all? I said what makes a great athlete isn’t just raw athleticism. It’s also the things that are harder to measure that makes someone good at sports. Those things you mentioned also fit the bill. So when I say our best athletes aren’t playing soccer, I’m saying not only are the guys with the best raw athleticism not playing soccer, but also our best sports players in general are not playing soccer.
He’s actually probably one of the worst examples to use for this argument as the things that actually made him a great (IQ, preparation, and vision) aren’t a function of raw athleticism
He wasn’t an INT freak because he used athleticism to beat people to the ball, it’s because he was the best in the history of the game at baiting throws and was phenomenal at reading QBs. He wasn’t an incredible returner because he was fast or a freak athlete, his speed was actually below-average for a safety. The picks he housed were on the back of spatial awareness and IQ. Go back and watch them if you’ve forgotten. You’re not seeing a sick athlete blow by. You’re watching methodical trodding through chaos knowing exactly where to weave on the path of least resistance
That spacial awareness and IQ would be helpful in soccer. But you’d be going outside of athleticism and that’s the whole point of this debate
So I’ll paste exactly what I said in my previous post:
Look, being a great athlete is about more than *just* raw athletic ability. When I say our best athletes play football and basketball, I don’t just mean the guys with the most raw athletic ability. I mean our best sports ball players are playing football and basketball. These are guys who have a natural inclination to be good at sports. Whatever is in their genetic makeup to have a knack for being good at athletic competitions with a ball.
Page 19 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News