In a previous thread and Post by AK48 in World Champions thread there is a comparison of current football(soccer) back to the 1970 team. I know that last Super Bowl there was a very large thread about how well the 1985 Chicago Bears would fare in today’s NFL (not well). It is interesting that Secretariat’s times stand the test of time, for instance.
So I am curious which sport has had the longest time period during which a previously athlete or team from X years ago would still be competitive today? Would having the equipment today change the competitiveness (like modern racecars, lighter padding and skates, and tennis rackets)?
I would have to say that American football has one of the shortest “competitive spans” of <10 years due to changing offenses, speed, and player size. With basketball nearing 30 years and baseball longer. Hockey and soccer, I am only familiar with the current games and other sports not so familiar.
For pure athletic talent, I don’t know that the NBA is any better now than it was, say 30 years ago. I’m confident that Magic and Bird would be stars today.
Going even further back, I think Russell and Chamberlain could still compete today, but recent centers (Shaq, Howard) probably wouldn’t let them put up the ridiculous stats they did in their time.
In fact, some NBA fans would probably tell you that teams 30, 40 or 50 years ago were more fundamentally sound than today. I think Russell’s Celtics could compete with Kobe’s Lakers, no problem.
Expanding on this point, ridiculous early-player stats are often a result of a player exploiting a weakness in the game/strategy that isn’t available to later generations (because counterstrategies naturally evolve).
So I’d say that until a sport’s statistics “settle down”–i.e. very few/no extreme outliers–the stats that a player develops are in no small part due to the era in which they play, i.e. there were strategies the players could exploit that are not productive in later seasons. A significant part of answering ths question, then, is determining when a sport started to normalize statistically.
I don’t believe AK48 was comparing those teams directly, just their strength relative to the skill at the time. It’s pretty common to think that the 1950’s Hungary team was the best national soccer team of all time, but nobody thinks they’d compete today.
As to what sports have changed the least, I think you have to look at ones in which athleticism plays a smaller role.
I’m sure the star players could compete, but I think the average players are faster and stronger, and I am certain they’re bigger. Magic was one of the first really big guards.
I think the answer on a world stage might be cricket. There hasn’t been a noticeable increase in the quality of bowling for many years, to be honest: most of the fastest bowlers today bowl at speeds that were common in the 70’s and 80’s, and apart from a few lights there aren’t many good spin bowlers around at all. And the batsmen only seem to do better because of better-maintained pitches. Going back even further–can anybody seriously claim that Don Bradman, whose greatest years were in the early thirties, wouldn’t succeed today? The game just hasn’t changed enough to pass him by.
I recognize that a lot of people like to believe this, but there’s no way it reflects what would actually happen if you matched these teams up. Look, Serge Ibaka has this body here. He’s six-ten and he can do thesethings. Blake Griffin is six-ten, 250, and can do the next two things on this video. It doesn’t seem to you like Robert Parish and George Johnson probably would have lost to these guys in the decathlon? I actually got the NBA channel not that long ago, so I’ve watched a lot of games from the era you’re talking about. I don’t recall the players looking like that or doing anything, ever, that looked like that. It’s a completely different world in terms of athletic talent.
Russell’s Celtics would lose by 50, and that’s not a knock on them; it’s just that it’s a completely unfair comparison. Bill Russell was six-nine and about 215 pounds, and his teammates were appreciably shorter; Kobe would nearly be a match in terms of height and weight for the other big men on the Celtics. Lamar Odom is six-ten and 220, shoots a respectable percentage from three point range (a concept that didn’t even exist, much less one that the players were proficient in) and he can handle the ball well enough to run the offense. And he comes off the bench for the Lakers. I don’t know what on earth those guys would do with Gasol or Bynum. It would be red murder from the opening tip, and that’s honestly how it should be. It’s not like our mountain climbers or ditch-diggers are getting worse at their jobs.
Almost all sports are better played now. I totally agree that the common “the NBA used to be better when Magic and Bird were around” stuff is plainly wrong; I don’t think it was nearly as good.
The smoothest curve is probably baseball, if or no other reason than being strong or fast will only take you so far; it’s more of a hand-eye coordination sport than anything else. But… frankly, baseball’s better than it used to be. If I watch World Series games from the 1970s and 1980s I’m always struck at how they don’t look like they would match up with today’s teams. I was watching the 1980 World Series between the Phillies and Royals and the calibre of play simply was not what it is today. They were good ballclubs, and the real superstars like George Brett and Mike Schmidt sure could play some baseball, but below them the quality just did not look like it could compare with a solid team today. I’m convinced if you had a time machine and could match either of those clubs up against the 81-81 Blue Jays of 2011, the Jays would beat them up.
While I agree that batting and bowling standards haven’t changed much I think fielding has become much sharper than it was back in the 1980s. So there is that to factor in.
If anything though, I think today’s players would struggle with the primitive pitches of yore more than their grandfather would on today’s wickets. I’d wager Bradman would score more today against today’s attacks than Tendulkar would against the bowlers of the 1930s. And who wouldn’t pay to watch Sobers play in a 20/20 or one dayer?
We actually have a possible test case happening in New Zealand at the moment; Martin Crowe aged 49 and retired since 1996 is trying to make a comeback. He made 15 not out in his first game back, albeit in the reserve grade in Auckland club cricket. Still I reckon he’s got a 50/50 shot of making it to first class cricket by the end of the summer…
Boxing has to be the shout here. The marquee sport (in the US) from 1900-1950, and been on the decline since. Boxing fans are fond of making top 10 all time lists - it’s very rare for a modern fighter to be considered the top dog. The consensus pound for pound greatest of all time is Sugar Ray Robinson - won 173, lost 19, drew 6. Fought in the 40s to the 60s at welter and middleweight. He would destroy the current crop of fighters 140 - 160 lbs - Athleticism might have improved, but skills, ring strategy and heart never go out of style.
Take a modern legend like Marvin Hagler (won 62, lost 3) - he would go through the current bunch of middleweight fighters like a dose of salts. But compare him to Harry Greb, who fought in the early part of the 20th century. Won 261 (!!), lost 19, drew 18, in the heyday of boxing. And fighting all comers, lightweight up to light heavy.
Ironically, current heavyweight fighters would be very strong in relation to their forefathers. Any boxing fan will tell you that the hw division sucks balls and has done for years. But given that it’s 200lbs and upwards, the sheer size of the modern hw fighter starts to tell and would overwhelm many of the smaller hw fighters from back in the day. Take someone like Lennox Lewis, very big and very skilled, but fighting in a piss-weak era. It’s still hard to see how any of the legends of yesteryear could have coped with such a physical specimen possessing such skill. Modern conditioning is also far more of a difference maker at heavy weight than at the lighter weights.
Well if the refs from that era were reffing the game the current players would take at least a little bit of time before they could remember not to “travel” every time they dribbled or dunked. And there’d be a lot of technical fouls for grabbing the rim as well.
In football (soccer) one could argue than on a purely technical level (pure ball skills), surpassing 1970 Brazil is almost impossible, excpet for Barcelona now. However, watching a 1960’s or 70’s match is also painfully slow, the level of athelticism is dismal compared even to a mid-level team today. Defenders do much more than wait and kick shins and legs.
I’m sure. Probably offensive fouls, too. But Wilt also (apparently, based on film I’ve seen) goaltended the hell out of the ball all the time. It was a totally different game. On the other hand, the adjustments to those rules have come from the reality of the quickness and strength of the modern player, so wherever the refs decided to draw the line the modern guys would be running circles around the, uh, old guys.
I’m sure Dwyane Wade would be content to use a straight line dribble to the front of the rim, no carrying, as he blew by the 175 pound guy who was standing upright at the top of the key trying to guard him. And imagine players from that era trying to defend Shaq with the kind of straight-up man, two feet on the floor below the rim kind of thing Wilt was up against, instead of leaning on him and pushing and hacking like they did during Shaq’s career. Shaq would probably shuffle his feet somewhat less.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if a modern tennis player went back in time and faced Björn Borg… with both using wooden rackets.
Another interesting question would be: how long would it take the old greats to catch up? Sheer size and strength gives a big advantage to modern players in a lot of sports, but could a time-traveling great bulk up in a couple years and even the playing field? Think about how Barry Bonds went from a skinny base stealer to the Incredible Hulk bashing balls out of the stadium in the cold night air. He had help, but some pretty amazing transformations would be possible even without it.