By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - USA has the best athletes in the world?

Played_Out said:
The US produces the largest proportion of top athletes because it is by far the world's largest developed nation. It's as simple as that.

Using the NBA or NFL as examples is a joke though, as Basketball and American "Football" are not played outside of America. They are sports invented by Americans so that they wouldn't feel bad about getting their ass kicked at real football (ya know, the one you actually play with your feet, as the name suggests). And don't even get me started on baseball or the ironically named "World Series"!

We have a variation of Basketball in the UK, but it is more difficult because you are not allowed to dribble. It's called Netball and it is played almost exclusively by schoolgirls.
We also have a variation of Baseball, but it is more difficult as you have to use a much smaller bat. It's called Rounders and it's played almost exclusively by schoolgirls.
We also have a game similar to American Football. It's called Rugby and it's played by posh blokes in shorts and t-shirts, not a bunch of steroid-freak pussies wearing helmets and pads so they don't get their pretty little faces smashed in!

In conclusion: Americans are pussies, and our empire was much bigger than yours will ever be!!!

P.S. Indians may be not be very good at most western sports, but they'll kick your ass at Kabaddi.

I agree with you on American Football but not Basketball.  Basketball is actually pretty big in Latin America and some European Nations.  There has been a flood of Non-American Talent coming into the NBA lately, as well as in the NCAA (College League, my university has 5 foreign Basketball players and so does my Futbol team) and I don't think it will stop anytime soon.  The same goes for Baseball but I don't like it very much.  I would say Hockey but our neighbor up north has an advantage over us in that.



Hi, this is Vince with Shamwow.

Around the Network

The 2nd post shows that austrailia is the most athletic country per capita. Really, you can have one or two guys from some obscure country be the best at a sport and that would make that country have the best athletes in that sport in the world.



Suggesting Randy Moss or Lebron James playing soccer is retarded. By that rationale alone Michael Johnson should have been the best corner or WR ever, but he sucked when he played football.

The US has the best athletes, I believe mainly because of opportunity and healthy competitions from Elementary to High School to University to the Professional level. The equipment and professionalism when it comes to sports in the US is 2nd to none, add that a huge population and you get what you get.

A good sports program will make your athletes good, Cuba with 10 million people or so and an awesome sports program collects medals left and right.

With that said, I believe China will get 1st place in the Olympics this year.



Its the truth and they say the truth hurts.

Having the best athletes doesn't translate into an automatic victory, otherwise USA would have won the gold last year in BBall. Fluke it may have been Greece still won, however I doubt the same happens this year because the USA assembled a better squad with Kobe.

I don't think Argentina or Spain stands a chance this go around.



Friend Code : 2878 - 9590 - 0767

 

 

jankazimierz said:
The 2nd post shows that austrailia is the most athletic country per capita. Really, you can have one or two guys from some obscure country be the best at a sport and that would make that country have the best athletes in that sport in the world.

Actually I disagree with that, and my arguement is simple, in the olympics you cannot have 3 finalists from the same country in a lot of events. You cannot have 3 US swimmers in the finals, you cannot have more than 1 judoka or 1 wrestler or 1 boxer per weight class, you cannot have 3 US Basketball teams, etc..so it is limiting on how many medals you can win because even if you have the 8 best 200 Medley swimmers in the world, only 2 can swim in the finals.

With that said, I believe it is much more to do with what I said earlier (healthy competition, top of the line equipment, great coaches, money invested in it from the government, etc...) than it has to do with genetics. Some are genetic freaks like Lebron, but most are just beneficiaries of a great system that really offers a lot of incentives torwards sports.



Around the Network
HoodFigga said:
Its the truth and they say the truth hurts.

Having the best athletes doesn't translate into an automatic victory, otherwise USA would have won the gold last year in BBall. Fluke it may have been Greece still won, however I doubt the same happens this year because the USA assembled a better squad with Kobe.

I don't think Argentina or Spain stands a chance this go around.

Greece won what last year?

The US always had the best basketball players, what it misses is chemistry. The rest of the world has been catching up, that is a fact. The Euro league is a lot stronger than before and it is offering competitive salaries. I also think the US will win it this year, but I do not think it will be as easy as you think..



FilaBrasileiro said:
jankazimierz said:
The 2nd post shows that austrailia is the most athletic country per capita. Really, you can have one or two guys from some obscure country be the best at a sport and that would make that country have the best athletes in that sport in the world.

Actually I disagree with that, and my arguement is simple, in the olympics you cannot have 3 finalists from the same country in a lot of events. You cannot have 3 US swimmers in the finals, you cannot have more than 1 judoka or 1 wrestler or 1 boxer per weight class, you cannot have 3 US Basketball teams, etc..so it is limiting on how many medals you can win because even if you have the 8 best 200 Medley swimmers in the world, only 2 can swim in the finals.

With that said, I believe it is much more to do with what I said earlier (healthy competition, top of the line equipment, great coaches, money invested in it from the government, etc...) than it has to do with genetics. Some are genetic freaks like Lebron, but most are just beneficiaries of a great system that really offers a lot of incentives torwards sports.


 Euhm it is about GOLD medals....What you are saying (if I am right) is that it is not fair.  Because you only have one wrestler so you can't have all three medales,  if that Wrestler wins gold it would not make any change if you had three wrestlers from your country winning gold/silver/bronze;.






The scary thing for the rest of the world is that Australia's BEST athletes nearly all play Australian Rules Football, so the performances you see from Australia in things like the Olympics, rugby, soccer, hockey, netball and so on are not indicative of the best the country has to offer. The top players in the AFL have insane sporting talent. If the AFL didn't exist, Australia would have a far greater presence in the other sports, FAR greater. It's a good thought for the Aussies, but also a little scary imo that a country with such a small population can so consistently produce freakish athletes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65NdEJDNNfE

Have a look at that, the way some of those guys jump like that is ridiculous, and the entire game is played without any sort of padding aside from a mouth guard.



madkiller said:
That table about medals per population means NOTHING. You know why? Because you can still have the same number of athletes that are actually in the Olympics. Also, the Olympics are made up of mostly amateur athletes and hardly anyone watches that crap anymore anyway. News flash, Soccer(futbol) sucks and is boring. The reason people in other countries like Soccer so much is because that this is the sport they are actually good at and it requires almost no expense at all. All you need is a ball, a field, and something to use as a goal(2 sticks would work really). Most of the sports in the Olympics are boring and a waste of time. Sports like American Football, Baseball, Basketball, Hockey, etc. require a lot more overall atheleticism because you have to do multiple things at the same time. Most Olympic sports require you do do only 1 thing at a time.

What a ridiculous post.  The sports you like, actually have watched and understand require more athleticism and you have to do multiple things at the same time, but the ones you don't like, haven't watched and don't understand don't?  Right.  That's like me saying that most American football players are unskilled fat brutes with no athletic skills beyond weight and strength, except that part is actually true.



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)

weezy said:
If our best athletes in the US were playing soccer it would be like a WORLD
allstar team over here. Imagine our soccer team.. all 6'4''+ super athletes who are bigger,faster,stronger than the rest.


Weezy, you're either insane or ignorant. You clearly know nothing about football since you think a team of all 6'4", fast and strong players would dominate in football. Actual skills are much more important than size and strength. I'm sure you're unaware that Pele is 5'10" and Maradona 5'4", hopefully you at least know who they are.



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)