The Greatest Teams Ever Debate (Dublin - The Greatest Team Ever?)

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

mickmackey1 wrote: »

And a mediocre team from the 2050s would hammer the Dubs of today, so your point is meaningless.

Yeah, that's quite likely.

The Talking Bread wrote: »

I think that is the exact point he is making to be fair.

It is indeed.

mickmackey1 wrote: »

It sounded like he was dissing the lads from the past.

Not at all.

omega man

mickmackey1 wrote: »

And a mediocre team from the 2050s would hammer the Dubs of today, so your point is meaningless.

I don't know, that 2050 Dubs team aren't great, well not all of them in fairness - Fingal were decent. The other 3 are poor though. Still I get your point.

Stoner

The Talking Bread wrote:

What is your point about this Dublin team.

Lol, good man

Stoner

Good man Sonny

You sparked off a good thread with no mention of GPSs or Tees.

BonnieSituation

Stoner wrote: »

Good man Sonny

You sparked off a good thread with no mention of GPSs or Tees.

And then YOU go and spoil it all...

Stoner

BonnieSituation wrote:

And then YOU go and spoil it all...

It's Friday are you not milling a sheep's head for dinner or something?
Maybe a trotter?

Stoner

The Talking Bread wrote:

Some players in that Kerry 70s team may not adapt to the levels of conditioning, intensity, dedication, the increasing focus on the team element rather than individual talent etc.

Exactly Spillane might have loved it, but would Bomber ?

Stoner

Shurimgreat wrote:

Just why Dublin was so relatively average up until recently is frankly bizarre. It would be akin to Celtic or Real Madrid being a mid table side who occasionally challenged for the title.

Average?

Take away the current team and you have 22 AI wins, a bit off Kerry and a bit off third place but most definitely a silver medal.

BonnieSituation

Stoner wrote: »

It's Friday are you not milling a sheep's head for dinner or something?
Maybe a trotter?

I'm watching the the greatest team of all time win our 27th All Ireland like any true Dub should be. Also it goes off RTÉ Player tomorrow as a heads up.

Stoner

BonnieSituation wrote:

I'm watching the the greatest team of all time win our 27th All Ireland like any true Dub should be. Also it goes off RTÉ Player tomorrow as a heads up.

I've the HD recording from saorview .
Going to keep it as the DVDs have no halftime analysis

Sonny678

Dublin have only won 9 All Irelands if you take away this decade.
Dublin have only won 15 or so All Irelands not 27
Why becuase up to the 1940s and 1950s all Dublin teams where predominantly country lads playing for Dublin. The first Dublin team with Dublin players predominantly from Dublin is in the 40s and 50s with Kevin Heffernan and Vincent's.

Actually the first real gaelic football team from Dublin is in the year 1955. That could be classified what everyone labels an inter county team. This is the year zero for Dublin football. The first All Ireland won by Dublin is in 1958.
Then in 1974 you have the birth of modern Dublin eg hill 16, the boys in blue and Heffo's army.

The impact of Kevin Heffernan has had on Dublin GAA is nothing short of remarkable. Why there is no statue or Street named after this great GAA man is disgraceful. Without Heffernan there is no Dublin GAA.

So Dublin up to 40s was country lads playing for Dublin . For example in a All Ireland final in 1943 between Kerry and Dublin, the best Kerry player on the field was playing for Dublin and the best player on the field was a longford man playing for Dublin.
Dublin have 7 hurling all Ireland titles. Yet only 2 players born and bred in Dublin have won hurling All Ireland medals .

Of course some will say Colm Rourke. But he was 1 player and he was reared and living his life in Meath will be brought . But Dublin did not have a team of Colm O Rourkes . Up to 1940s and 50s Dublin had 10 or 11 or more Sean Johnston on their team.

So if you take that 80 year period from 40s to noughties the golden age of Meath football Meath did go toe to toe with Dublin.

I know some will I'm picking my timescale, but a 80 year period is a pretty long scale. It's pretty much 3 or 4 generations and the lifespan of 12 US presidents. Not a blip of time but nearly a century of football.

This decade Dublin pumped up with multi millions, a golden generation of players, brillant managers, and a growth of Dublin GAA in middle class Dublin suburbs and great planning and structure on and of the field Dublin have reached potential with having won 5 in 7 years.

While Meath have a natural dip after such a long period of sucess, the effect of Boylan leaving similar to Ferguson leaving Utd, lack of underage sucess, bad planning and preparation by County board and bad magerial choices and drying up of talent means this is Meaths worst decade since 1930s.


So before this decade for 80 years or so Meath were going toe to toe with Dublin


In 1940s Dublin win 1 All Ireland Meath won 1 All Ireland

In 1950s Dublin win 1 All Ireland Meath win 1 All Ireland

In 1960s Dublin win 1 All Ireland Meath win 1 All Ireland

In 1970s Dublin win 3 All Ireland Meath win 0 All Irelands

in 1980s Dublin win 1 All Ireland Meath win 2 All Irelands

In 1990s Dublin win 1 All Ireland Meath win 2 All Ireland

In Noughties Dublin win 0 All Ireland Meath win
0 All Irelands

And now we have this decade and Dublin start reaching potential with all the resources and advantages they have.

While Meath if they don't reach an All Ireland in the next two years ( which looks impossible) itwill be the frist decade since 1930s Meath haven't reached an All Ireland final . The only other counties to do the same feat would be Kerry Cork and Galway. Dublin havent, because they did not reach All Ireland final in the 00s.

Sonny678

I respect anyones view who think this is the best era because players or fit. And player from past wouldn't be able to play to a high level today. But just find the whole viewpoint doesnt make any sense and I totally disagree 110%. .

But we will agree to disagree. I'm not going to change my mind

Two question I would to hear answer.

1 If people see sport men today as the best ever do they not then consider Kitschko the greatest heavyweight boxer of all time. Most boxing fanatics would say Ali is the greatest
Do people here not believe Ali is the greatst boxer of all time

2 Most golf fans consider Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time. Again do people not consider Jack Nicklaus as the greatest golfer of time

While In America the home of modern sport science a fitness mad country they still consider Babe Ruth the greatest baseball player of all time. Yet technically the guy was obese.

In American football if you look at lists of the greatest players to ever play the game most players come from before 1980s and 90s.
And remeber American football is very much a power based fitness based game then say soccer.

What about Christy Ring? he is and will be considered the greatest hurler of all time now and well into the future by hurling fans. Can anyone explain why so many greatest players ever in nearly every sports field is from an older era except gaelic football.

Pele is the greatest Soccer player ever. And Brazil 1970 are considered the best soccer team ever

Chicago Bears of the 80s are considered in the top 2 or 3 and by many as the greatest American football team ever

George Best is considered the most talented soccer player to play in British soccer. But surely Hazard would be more talented seen he has all the sport science on his side.

Powerhouse

The Talking Bread wrote: »

It was easier for a good team to win an AI in the 70s than it is for a good team to do so at the minute yet Dublin have won 5 out of 7 since 11 so it is saying something.

Really? How do you judge that? No team in the 1970s won 5 All Irelands in 7 years yet Dublin are able to do so now? It's only "saying something" if one accepts that your opening premise is inarguably true.

In reality Dublin can breeze through most games and there is the potential for defeat in only maybe one game or at most two games a season. It seems to me that this is no more difficult that it has ever been for any team from the past. Yes, they train harder, for longer, and more often than in the past. Yes, 'strength and conditioning' etc. etc. but it's not clear that the competition is intrinsically more difficult to win. No provincial final was won by less that 8 points this year, and leaving aside the Kerry-Mayo and Dublin-Mayo games the matches from quarter-final on featured huge margins. Its tightest margin was 8 points (Kerry-Galway) and ranged to absolute turkey-shoots in Dublin's games v Monaghan & Tyrone, and Tyrone-Armagh, Mayo-Roscommon. Most of those teams are no nearer to being a threat to a potential All Ireland winning team than the cannon-fodder Connacht & Ulster champions of the '70s were.

Dublin are a great team but let's not blow the current competitive situation into something its not just to try to embellish Dublin. Allowing for the obvious changes that have occurred in the sport since the 1970s, Dublin are in as strong a position to win the All Ireland as any good team back then. Their chances of being knocked out before an All Ireland semi final next year are close to zero. It's not a bad starting position.

davedanon

Sonny678 wrote: »

I could go on and on

And you will, you will.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

There has been some talk in this thread about how emigration and poverty damaged football in Connacht. This makes sense, I've heard plenty of stories about how grim Mayo and Roscommon were in the past and how quick people were to emigrate. But how did Kerry escape this? I would have imagined that, as a peripheral west coast county, it wasn't a thriving spot for much of the 20th century. Surely they had to deal with the same problems.

Sonny678

I think it is a hard one to explain , kerrys phenomenonal sucess . Some people say they have an easy route in Munster .
But I think thats unfair because they always have to face Cork. And Cork have always been top divsion 1 team until this decade.

Yes probaly a couple of All Irelands they have won by being kerry and being able to win one when there was dip in other counties fortunes and an easy route to the final. But overall I would say 31 32 All Irelands for Kerry were down to the genius of Kerry football.
Actually I think kerry don't get praised enough for their haul of 37 titles. It's an extraordinary achievement.

I would give 3 personal reasons 1 producing football geniuses 2 Hard men 3 Resilient

Kerry replace Mick Dwyer in 60s with Sheedy in the 70s. They replaced Sheedy with Fitzgerald in the 80s. They replaced Fitzgerald with Russell in 90s. And replaced Russell with Cooper in 00s. And they will replace Cooper with Clifford in the 2020s.
They just keep producing genius player decade after decade.

They replace Paudi O Se in the 80s with Moyihan in the 90s. They replaced Moyihan with Tomas and Marc O Se in the 00s

They replaced Jack O Se in the 70s and 80s with Dara O Se in 90s and 00s. And they replaced Dara O Se with David Moran in this decade.

They just keeping producing great footballers in every section of the field.

2 When kerry have to be tough, they are as tough as nails. In the 40s, Antrim brought a new short passing game to Croker. Kerry pretty much roughed then up in the final . A big contervesey at the time.

In 78 spring Kerry met Dublin in the league or some other competition .
And the two teams knocked lumps out of each other. Many of that Kerry team said that was the making of that team. They were no longer afraid of a Dublin team who had aura and reputation at the time.

At the end of the semi final in limerick in 2014 v Mayo . In the final minutes they were dragging Mayo men all over field. Similar to what Dublin did in the last few minutes with Clarkes kick out last Sunday. Mayo were being tussled to the ground by Dublin players all over field to make sure Clarke had no outlet to kick to. Kerry did the same in 2014 v Mayo.

So when kerry need to be tough, those Hardy kerry mountain men can be tough and do what they have to do to win.

3 But the real reason is how resilent they are. They always well respond after a defeat. When they are knocked down , they get back up. Whatever challenge they face they can adapt to.

In the 60s, they had some bad loses to Down and Galway. People said kerry was finished. The new short passing and posession game did not suit Kerrys traditional kick and catch game.
Kerry adapted and won a double at the end of the decade 69 70.

In 1973, Cork won the final with an exhibition of football. People were expecting Cork not just to dominate Munster but the country for the coming years. Kerry came from nowhere in 75 with an even better style of football to win 8 Sam's in 12 years.

After bad loses in 01 to Meath, 02 to Armagh and 03 to Tyrone . People said kerry were finished they could not adapt to blanket defence. They would win Sam in 2004 . And after another bad defeat to Tyrone in 05 they won a double in 06 0 7 and again followed a defeat in 08 with another All Ireland in 09.

After losing to Donegal in 2012 people said kerry couldn't deal with new defence Donegal played.2 years later kerry played a blanket defence of sorts to beat Donegal in 14.

So that's genius of Kerry , they get beaten. They lick their wounds in the Kingdom over the winter and come back twice as strong and hungry for sucess in the next year.
Their ability to adapt to changes in football is breathtaking.

My own county Meath , Galway and Down ,all traditional kick and catch counties , have never really adapted to the new sweeper/ blanket defence/ possession games of the 00s. Kerry another traditional kick and catch county did.
Just accept their brillant because there is another multiple All Ireland winning great Kerry team coming down the tracks in the 2020s

The_Kew_Tour

Kerry is not exactly a small County either. Plus they dont play Hurling much. Its not to take away what looks like the Greatest team still of all time

Jippo

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Kerry is not exactly a small County either. Plus they dont play Hurling much. Its not to take away what looks like the Greatest team still of all time

Kerry have less population than Galway, Kildare, Limerick, Meath, Tipperary, Donegal, and Wexford.

A similar population to Mayo.

I think there are 16 hurling clubs in Kerry. Pretty much everything between Tralee and the River Feale is hurling.

salmocab

This greatest team talk is just that, talk. Its practically impossible to compare teams across generations, literally speaking I suspect the current Dublin team is the best of all time in so far as if you took any team from the past they would beat them but that obviously doesnt take into account better training nutrition sports science etc that modern footballers have. Looking at older teams like the Kerry and Dublin footballers of the 70s its easy to say if they were around now they would still be top footballers but maybe not, would a lot of those players not get picked up because they werent athletic enough these days? There is also the problem of comparing opposition and competitions, there are more games in the championship now so does that make it harder or easier (as teams are playing as a unit more before September) comparing to teams from nearly a hundred years ago is impossible because without anyone of us seeing them play we can only rely on the stats of who won games and championships. The only meaningful thing we can look at across generations is who won championships or maybe % of games won and even then with changes to the structures its still not a very good way to do it. Its impossible to state categorically who is the best of all time in my opinion.

The Talking Bread

salmocab wrote: »

This greatest team talk is just that, talk. Its practically impossible to compare teams across generations, literally speaking I suspect the current Dublin team is the best of all time in so far as if you took any team from the past they would beat them but that obviously doesnt take into account better training nutrition sports science etc that modern footballers have. Looking at older teams like the Kerry and Dublin footballers of the 70s its easy to say if they were around now they would still be top footballers but maybe not, would a lot of those players not get picked up because they werent athletic enough these days? There is also the problem of comparing opposition and competitions, there are more games in the championship now so does that make it harder or easier (as teams are playing as a unit more before September) comparing to teams from nearly a hundred years ago is impossible because without anyone of us seeing them play we can only rely on the stats of who won games and championships. The only meaningful thing we can look at across generations is who won championships or maybe % of games won and even then with changes to the structures its still not a very good way to do it. Its impossible to state categorically who is the best of all time in my opinion.

No doubt Sonny has!

Powerhouse

Jippo wrote: »

Kerry have less population than Galway, Kildare, Limerick, Meath, Tipperary, Donegal, and Wexford.

A similar population to Mayo.

I think there are 16 hurling clubs in Kerry. Pretty much everything between Tralee and the River Feale is hurling.

Population is nearly irrelevant in terms of assessing sporting potential. There is no established link between sporting achievement and population. Dublin won 1 All Ireland title in 28 years between 1983 and 2011 despite having a huge population. Almost one in five people living in Galway is a foreign national according to the census and you are citing their population as bigger than Kerry's? Their population might be but their pick isn't. Also in urban-heavy places like Dublin alternative options for sporting potential are huge. In other counties like Tipperary and Galway they pick from half the county in reality. Kerry has nearly 150,000 people and a huge pick in relative terms. Funny how you mention that Kerry has a 'similar' population to Mayo (it has 17k more) while having 'less' than Wexford (only by 2k!). I suspect that since you don't regard Wexford's population as 'similar' to Kerry's as well (even though it's far more similar to Kerry's than Mayo's is) that you are not exactly impartial on the question of what population statistics might tell us!!

Powerhouse

salmocab wrote: »

Looking at older teams like the Kerry and Dublin footballers of the 70s its easy to say if they were around now they would still be top footballers but maybe not, would a lot of those players not get picked up because they werent athletic enough these days?

That works both ways though for some reason teams are always compared on the modern team's terms. For example nobody asks about players playing these days who might be there primarily on athleticism and might have been less impressive in a game where they had to bring a specific set of skills to a position and were not chosen because they could cover 14k in 70 minutes.

Jonny Cooper has played full-back for Dublin in the past - 30 years ago he'd have been considered too small for the position against someone like Eoin Liston or Colm O'Rourke. These days it makes no difference as such a full-forward will be surrounded by defenders including a sweeper if he wins possession and a full-back is less exposed. Comparisons are impossible for many reasons.

As for the question of whether the number of games you play makes it more difficult to win an All Ireland? Well, again, there are different ways of looking at that - under the system 30 years ago Mayo wouldn't kicked a ball past the end of June as they'd have been knocked out by Galway in both of the last two years but they subsequently reached the All Ireland final both years. Clearly the greater number of games available to them made it easier these days. The Super 8 will serve to guarantee further that the same teams come through. A team will be able to lose three matches and win an All Ireland.

And that's not to even consider the great intangible that was the disruption to continuity an early exit for a county caused years ago when there was far more chopping and changing in selection. Transposing current results to the realities of the 1970s or 80s Andy Moran would not have seen Croke Park in the last two years never mind being in the shake-up for Footballer of the Year. In all likelihood he'd be in retirement already. Like I said nothing is simple when comparisons are genuinely broadened out.

The_Honeybadger

Powerhouse wrote: »

Population is nearly irrelevant in terms of assessing sporting potential. There is no established link between sporting achievement and population. Dublin won 2 All Ireland titles in 28 years between 1983 and 2011 despite having a huge population. Almost one in five people living in Galway is a foreign national according to the census and you are citing their population as bigger than Kerry's? Their population might be but their pick isn't. Also in urban-heavy places like Dublin alternative options for sporting potential are huge. In other counties like Tipperary and Galway they pick from half the county in reality. Kerry has nearly 150,000 people and a huge pick in relative terms. Funny how you mention that Kerry has a 'similar' population to Mayo (it has 17k more) while having 'less' than Wexford (only by 2k!). I suspect that since you don't regard Wexford's population as 'similar' to Kerry's as well (even though it's far more similar to Kerry's than Mayo's is) that you are not exactly impartial on the question of what population statistics might tell us!!

It's not irrelevant. If you have a big population, high participation and good club and coaching structures you have a much better chance of being successful than a small county. Dublin have made huge strides in improving access to coaching and increasing participation since the mid 00s and are reaping the benefits on the field. They have a critical mass now that should ensure they remain a top team indefinitely.

The challenge for the GAA now is how to bring the underperforming counties up to the required level. There is no credible plan that I am aware of and that is a bit of a worry. It's difficult to see an All Ireland winner outside of Dublin and Kerry over the next five years.

On the Galway point, we have a few foreign nationals in Kerry too, one of them was in goal for our winning minor team last weekend

The Talking Bread

Powerhouse wrote: »

That works both ways though for some reason teams are always compared on the modern team's terms. For example nobody asks about players playing these days who might be there primarily on athleticism and might have been less impressive in a game where they had to bring a specific set of skills to a position and were not chosen because they could cover 14k in 70 minutes.

Jonny Cooper has played full-back for Dublin in the past - 30 years ago he'd have been considered too small for the position against someone like Eoin Liston or Colm O'Rourke. These days it makes no difference as such a full-forward will be surrounded by defenders including a sweeper if he wins possession and a full-back is less exposed. Comparisons are impossible for many reasons.

As for the question of whether the number of games you play makes it more difficult to win an All Ireland? Well, again, there are different ways of looking at that - under the system 30 years ago Mayo wouldn't kicked a ball past the end of June as they'd have been knocked out by Galway in both of the last two years but they subsequently reached the All Ireland final both years. Clearly the greater number of games available to them made it easier these days. The Super 8 will serve to guarantee further that the same teams come through. A team will be able to lose three matches and win an All Ireland.

And that's not to even consider the great intangible that was the disruption to continuity an early exit for a county caused years ago when there was far more chopping and changing in selection. Transposing current results to the realities of the 1970s or 80s Andy Moran would not have seen Croke Park in the last two years never mind being in the shake-up for Footballer of the Year. In all likelihood he'd be in retirement already. Like I said nothing is simple when comparisons are genuinely broadened out.

They do, though.

That's the whole point. Evolution happens for a reason though, ie to better and progress success, ability, efficiency.

If you put Cooper into the 70s Kerry "squad", (as we are comparing this current Dublin team to the 70s Kerry squad: just in case you think I am referring to Gooch) deprive him of any of the benefits of the modern day football training, nutrition, strength conditioning, fitness, etc etc, ie have him on a level playing field with the status quo of his compatriots, he more likely wouldn't get into the team, maybe not the squad. Whereas if you put the Johnny Cooper of today into the 70s, he would walk into the team and be one of the most effective players on the pitch.


Small example, study your own local club. How many lost talents has there been due to not adopting to required training regimes/lifestyle?

Powerhouse

mickeyk wrote: »

It's not irrelevant. If you have a big population, high participation and good club and coaching structures you have a much better chance of being successful than a small county.

On the Galway point, we have a few foreign nationals in Kerry too, one of them was in goal for our winning minor team last weekend

I didn't say it was irrelevant. I said it was nearly irrelevant. Big difference. In the case of, say, Kerry with nearly double the population of counties like Cavan or Offaly and all of the factors you mention in place and no obvious other conduit for young sporting talent it will matter. Somewhere like Dublin or Cork cities where you have young people playing multiple sports and many none at all citing population is far less relevant. No guarantee of high participation there. I remember hearing of a Cork city club who won an All Ireland under-14 competition some years back and at under-21 level only three of the panel were still playing.

As for the Kerry minor goalkeeper - I assumed the guy was born in Ireland, no? Even if he is a foreign national as you say, it hardly outweighs the amount that are found in urban centres like Galway and contribute to bloated population statistics yet can hardly be expected to hop off a plane and onto a county panel.

Powerhouse

The Talking Bread wrote: »

They do, though.

Can you point to some examples? I've no recollection of seeing this. Almost invariably you get trite commentary which concludes that every player now is the greatest. Would love to be pointed in the direction of some commentary which does not adopt the "Maradona was playing against defenders who were four stone overweight" position to quote a 28 year old friend of mine who recently found himself in a similar discussion about his own sport soccer, and raised some laughs.

P.S. My own club has more participants than it had 30/40 years ago and far more people sticking with it. Not sure what that tells me about the broader picture (locally it suggests probably greater transport and communications for starters which prevents players falling by the wayside) but that's the reality there.

The Talking Bread

Powerhouse wrote: »

Can you point to some examples? I've no recollection of seeing this. Almost invariably you get trite commentary which concludes that every player now is the greatest. Would love to be pointed in the direction of some commentary which does not adopt the "Maradona was playing against defenders who were four stone overweight" position to quote a 28 year old friend of mine who recently found himself in a similar discussion about his own sport soccer, and raised some laughs.

P.S. My own club has more participants than it had 30/40 years ago and far more people sticking with it. Not sure what that tells me about the broader picture (locally it suggests probably greater transport and communications for starters which prevents players falling by the wayside) but that's the reality there.

II am saying in general this would be the mindset of people. It is the hypothetical mindset.
It is just the reverse of saying that if the Kerry team, as they were then, same fitness, same lifestyle, skill practice, conditioning tactics, mentality, etc etc, entered onto a pitch with any of the top teams, maybe even average teams, would they beat them. Not a chance would they beat Mayo 17, Dublin 17, Kerry 17, Tyrone 17 and hard to know what average teams such as the QF this year they would beat either.

Some like Sonny disagree with this, though and seems to think that it wouldn't make much difference.
Which is a silly naive notion if you ask me.
He used individual sporting icons to press this point.

Would Klitscko at his peak have beaten Ali at his peak? Yes, probably. Resources.

Would the Leinster team that got hammered yesterday have beaten the Munster team that beat The All Blacks given their respective resources. Yes, of course
England 2016, knocked out by Iceland v England 66 that won the World Cup. The former would easily beat the latter.

Physical and exertion sports always strive to evolve so the more disparate the teams are from each other, chronologically, the less chance the predecessors have of winning (generally speaking...........obviously you have exceptions)

It is simple and obvious analogy and it takes away completely from the Thread Title debate as it just adds that awful hypothetical sense into an argument which doesn't allow for clear debate

The_Honeybadger

Powerhouse wrote: »

I didn't say it was irrelevant. I said it was nearly irrelevant. Big difference. In the case of, say, Kerry with nearly double the population of counties like Cavan or Offaly and all of the factors you mention in place and no obvious other conduit for young sporting talent it will matter. Somewhere like Dublin or Cork cities where you have young people playing multiple sports and many none at all citing population is far less relevant. No guarantee of high participation there. I remember hearing of a Cork city club who won an All Ireland under-14 competition some years back and at under-21 level only three of the panel were still playing.

As for the Kerry minor goalkeeper - I assumed the guy was born in Ireland, no? Even if he is a foreign national as you say, it hardly outweighs the amount that are found in urban centres like Galway and contribute to bloated population statistics yet can hardly be expected to hop off a plane and onto a county panel.

I live in a rural area and my young lad plays football, soccer and rugby. That's typical of his age group. The presumption that Kerry is football only and that anything else is frowned upon is wrong. There are lots of sports to pick from.

Kerrys success and tradition is probably the biggest factor. If you have the talent you are more likely to stick with it when you know you have a realistic chance of getting to All Ireland finals and winning them. Success breeds success and that carrot is not there in less successful counties.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Powerhouse wrote: »

In other counties like Tipperary and Galway they pick from half the county in reality.

Is the football hurling divide that big in Tipp?

Powerhouse

The Talking Bread wrote: »

II am saying in general this would be the mindset of people. It is the hypothetical mindset.
It is just the reverse of saying that if the Kerry team, as they were then, same fitness, same lifestyle, skill practice, conditioning tactics, mentality, etc etc, entered onto a pitch with any of the top teams, maybe even average teams, would they beat them. Not a chance would they beat Mayo 17, Dublin 17, Kerry 17, Tyrone 17 and hard to know what average teams such as the QF this year they would beat either.

Some like Sonny disagree with this, though and seems to think that it wouldn't make much difference.
Which is a silly naive notion if you ask me.
He used individual sporting icons to press this point.

Would Klitscko at his peak have beaten Ali at his peak? Yes, probably. Resources.

Would the Leinster team that got hammered yesterday have beaten the Munster team that beat The All Blacks given their respective resources. Yes, of course
England 2016, knocked out by Iceland v England 66 that won the World Cup. The former would easily beat the latter.

Physical and exertion sports always strive to evolve so the more disparate the teams are from each other, chronologically, the less chance the predecessors have of winning (generally speaking...........obviously you have exceptions)

It is simple and obvious analogy and it takes away completely from the Thread Title debate as it just adds that awful hypothetical sense into an argument which doesn't allow for clear debate

I'm not really sure why you keep repeating that current teams would beat teams from the past. That may (or may not) be the case (I just wouldn't know) but I'm not questioning that per se. All I have wondered about is why, in comparisons, it is so often done - and you are doing it in every example - with the assumption that the terms of engagement are always that of the modern team. Few seem to ask how modern days sportspeople would have survived in a different environment in the past - it's always the other way around which make genuine comparisons even more impossible.