Is the "Old vs New" debate unique to boxing?

[ShoulderRoll]

Yep. But what about Vince Lombardi's Packers or the 49ers of the 1980s to mid '90s that won their 5 championships. Wouldn't they also be competitive today? I think so, if they can be kept together.

The Packers were a heavily run-based team, I don't know how well they would fare under today's rules that have been changed so much in order to favor the passing game. It would be interesting to watch, I bet they would do well in dominating time of possession. But these modern offenses would probably torch their defense.

The 49ers were a great squad that could win in any era.

Personally the best team I ever saw was the Dallas Cowboys of the early '90s that won 3 Super Bowls and were one game away from appearing in 4 straight. That's about the best collection of talent you could ever hope to put together and we'll likely never see something like that again because the salary cap has since come into existence.

[Elroy1]

Yeah, I've seen that too. Doesn't mean boxing wasn't professional before that.

I'm not even going to attempt to get into it with you on that count, but suffice to say your nut bag partner in crime offered very flimsy points where boxing made some progress and ones that are easily countered also (such as bum Ali for example who in reality only showed us how piss weak the division was by how a featherfist chinny cruiser who couldn't even box properly like himself was able to win championship fights over the course of a couple of decades).

He then asked me to provide similar bench marks and I think on that score I did ok!! Simple as that.

[Elroy1]

Unfortunately I know nothing of baseball nor do most of the population of the world so if there IS nut baggery prevalent in baseball they are JUST as crazy as the boxing nut bags and it would seem to then be an American phenomenon.

Curiously, now that boxing is a global sport, how many nutbags are there from NON yankee countries??? Hardly any! There is a sizable contingent in Britain to be fair but if you go on Sad*o and check you will find a far more reasonable bunch of posters by comparison.

And of course in continental Europe and Australaia nut baggery has been basically totally eliminated.

[billeau2]

I believe it. Those guys had Chuck Noll's system mastered and ran it like a well oiled machine.

I remember thinking that the Niners in the eighties were unbeatable lol. Its an interesting debate...good for Bradshaw sticking to his guns.

[billeau2]

I'm not even going to attempt to get into it with you on that count, but suffice to say your nut bag partner in crime offered very flimsy points where boxing made some progress and ones that are easily countered also (such as bum Ali for example who in reality only showed us how piss weak the division was by how a featherfist chinny cruiser who couldn't even box properly like himself was able to win championship fights over the course of a couple of decades).

He then asked me to provide similar bench marks and I think on that score I did ok!! Simple as that.

You didn't even mention it, Joe mentioned Spinks conditioning program. Shillstone is not even a boxing man, he is a conditioning coach And yes he is good at what he does, bernard Hopkins also utilized his work. By the way have you looked at his methods? they are hardly new. And boxers routinely employ nutritionalists, this is hardly a watershed moment.

But A for effort. At least you made an attempt to show evidence for one of your outrageous assertions. Its azz backwards but its a start, so I will pounce lightly in this case.

[Elroy1]

For a time there I thought that guys like Mike Tyson and Wlad Klitschko were unbeatable too.

In terms of Australian football I thought that the 1980's Hawthorn side was pretty much invincible too. However it was and is all relevant to the day and it was obvious to me THEN as well as now, that as time went on, they are ALL beaten, all of them...

In fact, even if ability's FROZE and nothing DID ever improve, then the future would STILL yield better and better athletes in every sport eventually.

This is simply the law of entropy at work. As time goes by there will arise someone who is better or states where all, most or many are better than any past condition, purely by just chance!

This is simply a fact!

[Elroy1]

You didn't even mention it, Joe mentioned Spinks conditioning program. Shillstone is not even a boxing man, he is a conditioning coach And yes he is good at what he does, bernard Hopkins also utilized his work. By the way have you looked at his methods? they are hardly new. And boxers routinely employ nutritionalists, this is hardly a watershed moment.

Anybody can go like 2 posts back from what you said and see my reference to the exact interview Joe quoted.

And in fact they can even see that Joe quoted me in his own post.

I've never seen you this bad to be honest Bill, I expect OneMoreRound to have nervous breakdowns and make a calamity of himself from time to time but I thought you were like a Nut Bag SS soldier or something, hardened by political doctorine..

It would be no pleasure dismantling you if your going to just yield to me like that, watch your step and put up a good fight so I can extract some satisfaction in exposing you atleast!

[billeau2]

For a time there I thought that guys like Mike Tyson and Wlad Klitschko were unbeatable too.

In terms of Australian football I thought that the 1980's Hawthorn side was pretty much invincible too. However it was and is all relevant to the day and it was obvious to me THEN as well as now, that as time went on, they are ALL beaten, all of them...

In fact, even if ability's FROZE and nothing DID ever improve, then the future would STILL yield better and better athletes in every sport eventually.

This is simply the law of entropy at work. As time goes by there will arise someone who is better or states where all, most or many are better than any past condition, purely by just chance!

This is simply a fact!

Do you know what the law of entropy is? Entropy itself is the tendency of something to maintain the status quo (move in a direction) until met with an equal or greater force. Some have used the law if entropy socially to indicate that a system will move into chaos over time...neither of which indicates the point you are trying to make. And you contradict yourself entirely because it 'its just by chance" then obviously no laws apply." Like Sonny says, "its easy like shelling peas" refuting your kindergarden logic.

Again, like a kindergardener you get an A for effort, trying to subscribe to the world as it is, with its physical laws as such, but you have not taken the time to understand those laws and you don't seem to get that a chance event, by its very nature does not subscribe to any antecedents...thats why its a chance event. Ok? Australian nutbag.

[billeau2]

Anybody can go like 2 posts back from what you said and see my reference to the exact interview Joe quoted.

And in fact they can even see that Joe quoted me in his own post.

I've never seen you this bad to be honest Bill, I expect OneMoreRound to have nervous breakdowns and make a calamity of himself from time to time but I thought you were like a Nut Bag SS soldier or something, hardened by political doctorine..

It would be no pleasure dismantling you if your going to just yield to me like that, watch your step and put up a good fight so I can extract some satisfaction in exposing you atleast!

Dude Ive never had to even try to refute you...you do a grand job yourself. You really got too excited, see post above... A conditioning coach who knows not about boxing creates a watershed moment in boxing...you don't see a problem with this? If you were right we would see a gigantic surge after Shillstone...we don't. Ariza gets more press, and neither guy has done much of anything for boxing.

[Elroy1]

Dude Ive never had to even try to refute you...you do a grand job yourself. You really got too excited, see post above... A conditioning coach who knows not about boxing creates a watershed moment in boxing...you don't see a problem with this? If you were right we would see a gigantic surge after Shillstone...we don't. Ariza gets more press, and neither guy has done much of anything for boxing.

I've done this sort of blind survey before, and anybody can repeat it.

It falls in line with what any honest man can see immediately with their own eyes..

PRIOR to the 80's boxing looked like complete and I DO MEAN complete garbage. It was almost unwatchable, 2 drunken looking feeble bodied, abysmally skilled men winging each other with no regard to tactics or defences etc.

AFTER the 80's- we see elite atheltes, we see strength, we see tactial gameplans and highly refined skills.

The boxers LOOK completely different. Muscular, tough, like actual men, not like children anymore.

I would claim that after this time there was most certainly a surge.

Repeat the blind poll, take 100 ordinary everyday people, show them random clips of boxers before and after, GEE I wonder which ones they will indicate are better!

Myth busted!