S, and N perception, and T and F judgment are implicit in every bit of data. If something "is", then in a universe of time, it must also be "heading" somewhere as well. If its heading somewhere, then it must first be something that "is". And if something "is", and is determined to be such by rational creatures, then it must also have some sort of "worth" (even if lack thereof). And again, if something has "worth", then it must be something that "is".
It's our ego consciousness that divides all of this into i and e (yielding 8 function-attitudes) and focuses more on one of these perpsectives and orientations or the other.
So yes, when you see "possibilities" in emergent "what is" data, then there is also a storehouse of "where it's going" data working in the background. In the football example that was cited, an emergent "what is" is the primary, conscious perspective. "where it's going" is in the background. So it was primarily an "Se" perspective. Ni-preferring types are not as focused on a physical perspective like that, until they have really matured and developed their tertiary or inferior.
On the other hand, if I'm focusing on emergent "where it's going" data, then a storehouse of "what is" is in the background as well. You keep disputing people on this stuff, but there really is no real conflict. It's just a matter of interpretation and rephrasing of Jung's concepts (which are very dense and prone to misunderstanding as it is, so you can't blame people for trying to recast it in their own way. He had even changed some of his concepts, so he is not so absolute).