Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are athletes born or built?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Are athletes born or built?

    Hey fellas, thought i would come to the world of SWDC and see if they could help me out with the current frustration. For my final paper in Physiology of Sport an Exercise I am writing a 6-10 page paper on the topic "Are Athletes Born or Built" dealing mainly with the Genetics, training, what athletes can get away with? what they need to do and what not.

    Im currently stuck on page 5 and would try to get to the 7 or 8 page area. Any ideas people have would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks!
    Last edited by SickwithIt1010; 12-13-2010, 10:45 PM.



    Originally posted by 49erNation85
    I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

  • #2
    both......

    BK

    Originally posted by AcheTen
    JPP is a better and more productive player than Brandon Graham
    Originally posted by abaddon41_80
    Is Shaun Hill a top 10 QB? Definitely not. Is he a top 20 one? Almost certainly.
    Originally posted by JBCX
    Most misleading 10+ sack season EVER.

    Comment


    • #3
      Have you written at least 2 pages about John Locke and "tabula rasa" yet? Your take on that theory should take up some space.




      2 C 5:6-8 Jakob Murphy aka themaninblack

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Rosebud View Post
        both......
        yes obviously. I guess my question is, what things do you believe are unteachable? and what do you think are things that have to be gained through training, and work?

        Can you be an elite athlete just off your genetics and god given abilities?

        Obviously i have my thoughts and opinions but im looking for some other thoughts. any type of idea i can use for a paragraph or a page in this paper ya know?



        Originally posted by 49erNation85
        I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by SickwithIt1010 View Post
          yes obviously. I guess my question is, what things do you believe are unteachable? and what do you think are things that have to be gained through training, and work?
          Speed you have it or you don't.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by CJSchneider View Post
            Have you written at least 2 pages about John Locke and "tabula rasa" yet? Your take on that theory should take up some space.
            I havent yet, I have quite a bit on Yannis Pitsiladis, who is a sports scientist who has worked with the runners over in Kenya. So far he is the most notable guy I have used.

            Definitely helpful!!



            Originally posted by 49erNation85
            I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SickwithIt1010 View Post
              yes obviously. I guess my question is, what things do you believe are unteachable?
              I would say height would definitely be something that you can't teach. You can teach someone to catch. You can teach someone how to throw a football or a baseball.

              And yes, you can even teach speed to a small extent. If you couldn't, combine training institutions might not exist.

              You can't teach someone to be a seven foot three NBA center. Although even there, giving someone human growth hormone as children are growing up can help with that, although that is not something I would recommend without medical reason.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by SickwithIt1010 View Post
                Hey fellas, thought i would come to the world of SWDC and see if they could help me out with the current frustration. For my final paper in Physiology of Sport an Exercise I am writing a 6-10 page paper on the topic "Are Athletes Born or Built" dealing mainly with the Genetics, training, what athletes can get away with? what they need to do and what not.

                Im currently stuck on page 5 and would try to get to the 7 or 8 page area. Any ideas people have would be greatly appreciated.

                Thanks!
                This is just my opinion.

                I think you mean professional athletes, and it's both. Players who are in the NFL, NBA, and so on are born with the proper genetics to do so, and were built by coaches and others to be there as well.

                I'm pretty sure there are many people out there with the physical attributes required to succeed in a sport, but they weren't built. In a similar situation, I'm pretty sure there are many out there who could be built to be great players, but sadly don't possess the physical attributes to do so.

                From things such as height, weight, type of body (ectomorph, endomorph, mesomorph), etc., one can say athletes are born that way.

                Even the less athletic players in leagues still have an advantage over others. Using the NFL as an example, the only position where one could argue that the athletes could only be built is kicker. If you train hard enough, I think you could be a pretty good kicker, and you don't really need great genes for that, just regularly train your legs. Not to say it's easy, just the position it's easiest for.

                Going into more detail, the elite skill positions, such as WR and CB, are basically defined by speed and athleticism. If you aren't born with it, you won't get very far. The only receivers who can get away with mediocre speed are the big ones, but they've got the physical advantage with height and whatnot.

                For linemen, you need to be able to carry a huge amount of weight while still be athletic. Nimble feet, raw, core strength and power, things of that nature.

                For QB's, you need to be tall (usually), and have a pretty damn good arm. As well as intelligent.

                These traits usually start to show from a young age. It's easy to notice who's faster than who, who's stronger than who, who plays better than who, etc. Not the best example, but look at the second play of this football game of very young kids:



                Some kids couldn't even bend down right, some didn't need to bend at all and still did. The kid who makes the tackle looks bigger and faster than anybody else. Don't know the specifics, but I doubt he's much older than the other kids.

                Ultimately, I believe that the athletes found in leagues are built from a pool of candidates born with the necessary attributes. Very rarely are they simply just built.

                Props to clover_jeez!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ability to digest a playbook.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mr. Goosemahn View Post
                    This is just my opinion.

                    I think you mean professional athletes, and it's both. Players who are in the NFL, NBA, and so on are born with the proper genetics to do so, and were built by coaches and others to be there as well.

                    I'm pretty sure there are many people out there with the physical attributes required to succeed in a sport, but they weren't built. In a similar situation, I'm pretty sure there are many out there who could be built to be great players, but sadly don't possess the physical attributes to do so.

                    From things such as height, weight, type of body (ectomorph, endomorph, mesomorph), etc., one can say athletes are born that way.

                    Even the less athletic players in leagues still have an advantage over others. Using the NFL as an example, the only position where one could argue that the athletes could only be built is kicker. If you train hard enough, I think you could be a pretty good kicker, and you don't really need great genes for that, just regularly train your legs. Not to say it's easy, just the position it's easiest for.

                    Going into more detail, the elite skill positions, such as WR and CB, are basically defined by speed and athleticism. If you aren't born with it, you won't get very far. The only receivers who can get away with mediocre speed are the big ones, but they've got the physical advantage with height and whatnot.

                    For linemen, you need to be able to carry a huge amount of weight while still be athletic. Nimble feet, raw, core strength and power, things of that nature.

                    For QB's, you need to be tall (usually), and have a pretty damn good arm. As well as intelligent.

                    These traits usually start to show from a young age. It's easy to notice who's faster than who, who's stronger than who, who plays better than who, etc. Not the best example, but look at the second play of this football game of very young kids:



                    Some kids couldn't even bend down right, some didn't need to bend at all and still did. The kid who makes the tackle looks bigger and faster than anybody else. Don't know the specifics, but I doubt he's much older than the other kids.

                    Ultimately, I believe that the athletes found in leagues are built from a pool of candidates born with the necessary attributes. Very rarely are they simply just built.
                    Thank you man, good post for sure and agree with you about basically all of it. video was too sick haha.



                    Originally posted by 49erNation85
                    I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Can you be an elite athlete just off your genetics and god given abilities?
                      Sure can look at half the 7 foot guys in the NBA, the ones who have made it that far being bigger than everyone.

                      I'd think that Romanowski would be a fantastic guy to use in this. I think he is as close to an elite athlete that has been "built" as you will find. He readily admits that he pushed his body to the absolute limits and used everything, legal or not, to get as far as he possibly could. Cushing and Matthews are both modern examples of guys that have "built" themselves up.

                      I think on this topic that the mental issue is probably more overlooked than the physical. You give me an athlete and I can probably find someone that is bigger or faster or both but the great athletes have the mental edge, the desire to push themselves to the limit and do everything that is required.

                      Obviously to a certain degree you are born to it but from that point on you are built. I knew a pair of twins, who physically were "identical" they both ran the same times in a 100m sprint, 1.5km run, a 50m swim. Had the same basic agility, that sort of thing. If you tested them for athletic ability they were comparable but one of them was an absolute moungrel, loved getting his hands dirty and as a result was a great footballer(AFL), the other was soft, didn't like contact and quite simply was not a good player. He also didn't work as hard to develop technical skills or push his body as far. Over the 8 years that I played with both, one became an excellent player and the other was just plain average. Certainly leads me to think that an athlete is built as much, if not moreso, than they are born.

                      There are obvious disclaimers dependent on the sport as well. Obviously a sport like volleyball or the NBA much more lends itself to being "born" into it than a sport like baseball, golf or tennis for example. Sports where if you aren't a certain size then you are going to have an epic battle obviously require more of the born element.


                      Props to BK on the sig!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        the only position where one could argue that the athletes could only be built is kicker. If you train hard enough, I think you could be a pretty good kicker, and you don't really need great genes for that, just regularly train your legs. Not to say it's easy, just the position it's easiest for.
                        Even this position you require the natural muscles in the leg to be able to thump it. Take a guy like Sav Rocca(Eagles Punter) he grew up playing the same sport I did in AFL and no matter how much I trained I would never be able to kick like him. As someone who actually has spent a lot of time refining technique, working my legs and the like I can still not kick close to as big as him. I've been able to improve from kicking roughly 40m to around 55-60m but that still leaves me probably 20m short of where he was at and that applies to pretty much the entire AFL over here in comparison to him or Ben Graham(Cards P).


                        Props to BK on the sig!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I think athletes are born, but it takes building to realize their full potential. Obviously there are guys that are born into specific sports, but take someone like Lebron or any of the NBA guys. They all are naturally going to be tall dudes. They all naturally have good hand eye coordination (taught?), and all have natural speed and jumping abilities. None of that is built, it's genetics. The building comes from them combining the two.

                          I think this question deserves to be seperated too. Athletes should not be specified into specific sports, an athlete who is born or built is someone who just has athletic ability. Take skill in Xsport out of the eqaution and you have the basic athlete.

                          And I agree with the mentality argument because it is largely important, but I wouldn't apply the mental aspect to someone being an athlete. I think that is more of an acquired skill.

                          Originally posted by BeansDooma
                          who retires first: brett favre or aaron rodgers?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by CJSchneider View Post
                            Have you written at least 2 pages about John Locke and "tabula rasa" yet? Your take on that theory should take up some space.
                            Actually, Tabula Rasa was a Kate Centric episode. The first John Locke centric didn't come until the following episode in Walkabout. Sorry, I felt the need to do this.


                            RIP TheManInBlack

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Rosebud View Post
                              both......
                              This. You can be born with tremendous talent, but you have to cash in. Conversely, those with great work ethics can compensate for their lack of pure talent.
                              Just play me, baby

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information