Just trying to drum up a little chatter here. What really got me thinking on this was the commentary while watching the Wimbledon Men's Doubles Final. John McEnroe and the female commentator (can't remember her name) were discussing how well Nadal and Federer would do playing doubles together. McEnroe thought they'd have little trouble winning Wimbledon but the female thought they'd struggle because they didn't have the chemistry and because they didn't know the angles and little quirks that make doubles different from singles. I think there is something to be said for a doubles team having chemistry in tennis, but all the chemistry in the world isn't going to overcome playing against 2 of the better singles players in history.

One way to think about this is to ask yourself if the All-League team in a given sport would beat the championship winning team. Is there even a sport in which the All-League team would lose?

Maybe football. It takes at least a year for an O-Line to work well together.

Of the major sports, I agree that football requires a lot more "team" than most other sports. There is not only learning how to work with your teammates on the field, but there is also a lot more to learn as far as a playbook and game plan. It is just as critical that every player know what they are supposed to be doing so it can operate in unison.

I was thinking football as requiring the most and baseball probably requiring the least, without thinking about it too much. Maybe hockey is up near the top of the list also since the players are always weaving in and out and passing so much?

So do you guys think the All-NFL team would beat the New England Patriots? It's a hypothetical so assume some of the Pats (Brady, Moss, etc) have exact replicas on the All-NFL team.

I think the All-Pro team of any sport would probably be the "favorite" to win in any sport if given the time to practice, etc. Depending on the amount of time, there are several sports that I think the champ would have a legit shot to win.

Basketball was the first that came to mind. Look at the olympics - I think the U.S. easily has the most athletical, most talented players in the world but the "chemistry problem" and the world teams having much more time together is killing us in the international competition. Having played my whole life, there are many instances I have been part of or witnessed in which the "best" team has been easily defeated by "lesser" individual players.

I've never played but I would think hockey would be another sport that would be very similar. A well coached team with a good game plan should be able to overcome a talent descrepancy if the players work well together, IMO.

As for football, I think with a little time and the right system, the best of the best would be able to beat any individual team much more often than not.

quote:

Originally posted by Iguana:
I think the All-Pro team of any sport would probably be the "favorite" to win in any sport if given the time to practice, etc. Depending on the amount of time, there are several sports that I think the champ would have a legit shot to win.

I guess the amount of prep time for the All-Pro team would be whatever the Allstar teams have to prepare, that seems fair.

The debate always comes up on whether we should just send our NBA champion to the Olympics, and I think it's a good idea. Of course the way things are going it won't be long until at least one key player on every NBA team is international.

I think you can take baseball and hockey off the list. I have played both all my life. A great pitcher can dominate a game and a Gretzky and other greats showed they could almost single handedly win a game or even a series by themselves.

Football and soccer are the two I see needing the most chemistry. You may see great players have great performances, but that does not always lead to winning. Ask Dan Marino.

As for soccer, I love the game and played through highschool. I know that one defensemen making the wrong play or being out of position can cause a huge problem. If everyone is not where they are supposed to be you can look really stupid. Soccer has to be high on the list.

I'll definitely conceed hockey to you. It was more a hunch than anything. Also, as for basketball, I'm not positive it exactly fits per your criteria. I don't think you have to have great chemistry to be a great team but rather that great chemistry can make for a lack of talent.