I don't want to start an argument in this thread. Your response sounds exactly like what I would expect from a basketball coach.
Every sport is a "skilled experiential sport" not just basketball. One night at the all sports clinic in Lincoln my AD, an old basketball coach, and my head football coach almost came to blows because the AD insisted that basketball was a skill sport and football was not. The funny thing was that my head football coach was a multisport athlete at Black Hills St. in football basketball and track.
The bulk of basketball coaches at high school or less don't do a great job teaching skills compared to their efforts at installing their offense.
In this debate, what is true with regard to the distinction of football and basketball is first: basketball requires a skillset with more variety in it than most of the positions in football, and second, the variation of skillset among positions is much wider in football.
It is a study in arrogance and self-inflation to suggest that basketball requires more skill. Better to say potentially more skills depending on which position ones compares to, but the level of skill is no less in football, at any position, than basketball or any other sport.
Talent is what momma nature gave you, skill is what you work at. How much time you spend, under proper instruction, working on whatever skill one seeks determines how skilled you are, not the sport or specific skill.
To this, I care little for the term in football, "skill player". Frankly, this is about dumbarse.
Don't think any skill is involved in those great battles between edge rusher and OT?