Is the quality of sport getting better?

Great Debates
1

To what extent (if any) do you believe that the quality of play is getting better and better in sports as it progresses into the future?

Is the level of athleticism progressing in leaps and bounds or are there diminishing marginal gains as the years go on and will there be a time when the general level of athleticism will stabilise or decrease?

Even if it is assumed that we are getting better and better athletes as time progresses, are other concerns (increasing salaries and commercialisation, rule changes, structural changes) inhibiting the standards of athletes or teams as time goes on.

To illustrate, let me cite a couple of examples:

On the one hand, we have something like swimming or track and field. There can be little argument here against the fact that the standard of these sports has increased through the years and appears to be continuing in this trend. These sports have changed very little since their inception and we have a very objective measure (times) to gauge that standards are obviously increasing and have done so ever since the sports began.

On the other hand, we have something like Association Football (soccer). Since it began, the rules have changed little but the level of professionalism has greatly changed over the years, as have tactics, the general level of athleticism and the magnitude of and nature of skills. Comparisons of the standard of play between the past and present seem reasonably clear on a very broad level, using a broad timeframe, but what about the top teams or even the top leagues/nations? (or for that matter, the bottom?) The Bosman ruling (which allows players who are not under contract to move clubs without a transfer fee) have changed the nature of the European game forever as has the money that has poured in from television contracts. The other complication in making comparisons is that, unlike track athletes or swimmers, increased athleticism doesn’t guarantee better play in soccer.

Going back to the original question, even if it is assumed that the quality of play is definitely getting better as time moves on, does this have a perfect correlation with your enjoyment of these sports?

There are many fans who pine for the days when players had loyalty to teams and when the cashing-in wasn’t so rampant. Can these fans then cling to the consolation that the play is definitely getting better as time goes on?

This brings me to my favourite topic of discussion: Sports hypotheticals. Whilst I acknowledge, for instance, that Wilt Chamberlain was a great basketball player and extremely dominant athlete in his time, I doubt he would have been anywhere near as dominant if he had played today. This is basically because today’s professionalism and training techniques have brought better athletes to basketball to begin with and conditioned them to be more than they could have been in the 1960/70’s. Yes, Chamberlain would have also had these things available to him too and thus a young Chamberlain today would probably ultimately become a better and more skillful athlete today than he was in his day but overall, the increased level of competition would probably diminish his comparative advantage. Then again, I acknowldege that salary caps and free agency could counter my argument.

Sorry for the meandering post. I welcome any thoughts you may have on these or other related subjects. Thanks for listening.

2

Individually, today’s athlete is better than those of yesterday. The smart ones take the advice of the most elite of athletes of days past, and combined it with advances in sports medicine and technology, to tone and build and maintain their bodies into peak condition. We will see a lot more Rickey Henderson and Roger Clemens- type players in baseball, Pete Sampras types in tennis, and so on, because their strict regimen has proven to be fruitful in the short term and long term of their careers. We have more elite athletes because these athletes use what’s best for them and chaff away what is worst. Not to many players will be like David Wells.

That said, the fundamentals of many of the team and individual sports have been lost. One main factor is the younger and younger players coming into professional arenas. Although naturally talented, these up-and-comers tend not to have the timing and decision-making skills that can come only with extensive experience. They being relative rookies they tend to make more mistakes, and certainly do not handle such mistakes well. The lack of a college career may lead to social-related problems for some, prime example Allen Iverson. Not everyone at the beginning of their professional careers come in with the polished skills that Moses Malone or Tara Lipinski did, not even the great ones. And with the skipping of levels of organized sport, with skipping minor leagues and going straight to the majors, these players may not have honed the necessary passing, serving, or throwing skills needed to excel in the sports they choose. So the professional leagues have in essence become Remedial Sports 101 for some.

Notice the most successful teams between 1990-2000, Chicago Bulls and the New York Yankees. They each have one uber talented star (MJ for Chicago, Mariano Rivera for the Yankess) a very talented second and third guy (Pippen and Rodman, Bernie Williams and Derek Jeter), a strong supporting cast, and a calm head coach/manager. The most strinking part of their play was not the stats of the individual stars, but in their teamwork, which were by far way ahead of the rest. Despite MJ and Pippen and the flamboyance of Rodman, the Bulls were not a flashy team. The Yankees play so coolly you might mistake them for a cricket team. The great plays each team made, they practiced those. Phil Jackson took the Zen dicipline to the Lakers, and got instant results. Lou Pinella modelled this year’s Seattle Mariners team after the Yankees.

Moving players between teams have the most effect in the offensive and defensive lines of American football teams. The Super Bowl winners almost always have at least four linemen that stayed with each other for at least three years. The lines that stay together coordinate their blocks better, or can disupt offensive plays much better. The St. Louis Rams look so good (well, except when they played our Giants, who has the best defensive line in the league) because their offensive line is the best in the league. The Washington Redskins, well, now have a suckwagon on this message board, because with all the talent coming and going through the organization, the offensive and defensive lines are still pitiful. Randall Cunningham would have been the best quarterback of all time if he had a decent offensive line early in his career.

3

In my day, ballplayers were for shit.

4

Now there’s a compliment, I wouldn’t have expected to see on these boards! :slight_smile:

I’m not sure how much better the current top players (all sports) are compared to the best of yesteryear. But IMHO, the current average player is profoundly more proficient.

5

There is absolutely no question thst, in every major sport, the athletes are bigger, stronger and faster than they used to be.

However, the end result is not always more enjoyable to watch. Look at men’s tennis for a good example. Pete Sampras and Goran Ivanesivic are MUCH bigger and stronger than Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe were- and yet, that’s precisely why a Wimbledon match between Sampras and Ivanesivic is so deathly dull! Watching big, strong guys fire aces at each other is BORING!

6

My grandfather played Australian Rules Football in the 1950s, and played for Western Australia as full forward in the State of Origin side (which was the highest level of Aussie Rules you got at that time). He says that if he was at the peak of his fitness and skills now, he’d get creamed. The nature of professional sports allows athletes to train fulltime, and to start training younger. Even 20 years ago, athletes had to work in other jobs as well as train.

(Speaking of cricket, even they are starting to look fit nowadays. I remember when Merv Hughes jumped the balcony during a lunchtime recess in a Test match to go and line up for chips and gravy. Warne still smokes (I assume), but the rest of them actually look like sportsmen.)

7

Actually, swimming has changed quite a lot since it was introduced. And I don’t mean from Ancient Greece til now. I swam in high school and then stopped til last year, a change of 10 years. In those 10 years a number of things have changed that make it easier to go at least a little faster.

For instance, instead of touching the wall and then turing around on the back stroke you can now flip over before the wall and then turn around. Actually if you look at some of the film from the first few Olympics you will see that people didn’t even do flip turns in any stroke.

The brest stroke has changed even more, I don’t even know how to do a “modern” stroke as its chaged enough.

Other changes include new training techniques that are supposed to help and even new swim suits.

I don’t know a lot about track but I"m sure the same thing applies there too, new shoes, strenght training etc have all improved.

As for how the quality of sports is getting better? I guess if you like swimming etc now that’s not gonna change much, I don’t think we’re gonna see records broken all the time, and at some point its gotta stop. More professional sports I really don’t know as I don’t pay much attention to them. I’m guessing that mostly things will improve though I don’t know by how much.