|
I would argue that while soccer, hockey, and basketball are all exceedingly different - different surfaces, body parts, etc...they're also quite similar - in that if you can 'read' the game in one, you'll be able to do the same in the others. I'm talking about hockey 'sense' or the way a midfielder reads the flow of the game and makes the right play, or can plan his team's ball movements four steps ahead or the way a point guard spots the backdoor cut of a teammate.
soccer ends up being far superior to these two because there are no constant timeouts or switching of players - no coach holding your hand to make your decisions for you. the soccer player has to be far more proactive and 'smarter' than these other athletes.
The same way I'd argue all three of these sports to be superior to baseball and football; its not about mastering a singular talent (as these sports seem to be) - its about mastering many and knowing when and how to use them, and to be in exceedingly good shape - something not needed in many football and baseball specialised positions.
then again, maybe I'm biased, I've played all 5 at a respectable level - and I was far poorer at baseball - baseball at its root is all about having remarkable hand eye coordination; and its hard to overcome an relatively average handeye coord if that's all the game boils down too.
I'm sure we've all played the other sports with guys that had insane skills but were utterly useless in a 'real' game - thinking is a huge component of most team sports. My argument is you only need the 'insane skills' portion to be a very good ball player.
This is also why good baseball sims are far easier to create - the stats really do tell 90% of the story; whereas I'd argue the other sports are very hard to quantify on a statistical level.
|