Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r9etb
Actually, by "athletic", I'm ignoring the skill aspect entirely. A running back and cornerback are athletic positions, a wide receiver and quarterback are less so. A kicker needs to be barely athletic at all. But it doesn't hurt.

For me, the decathlete is the worlds greatest athlete. If you put a decathlete on a soccer pitch, he'll do fine. If you put him on a baseball diamond, he'll look like a fool if he's never played the game. (Try playing slow-pitched softball with people from cultures who play cricket.)

The decathlete could play basketball if he didn't have to score and could play several football positions with the barest of practice. (Assuming he played in a league with people of similar size.)

You've made pointless distinction -- skill and physical ability are inseparable components of "athleticism."

On the contrary. They get separated all the time. Hockey has good skaters, good stick-handlers, goons, etc.

105 posted on 03/23/2004 9:03:22 AM PST by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: AmishDude
On the contrary. They get separated all the time. Hockey has good skaters, good stick-handlers, goons, etc.

So you're basically telling us that it's possible to be a great athlete, and yet have no skills....

You realize that's not even remotely true. You're saying basically that "athletic" is the same as "physical," but we all know that great athletes have to be both physically gifted, and skilled at what they do.

113 posted on 03/23/2004 9:19:18 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson