Sports GOATS

[MuggsyB]

I actually agree with most of what you're saying.  I qualified my assessment from "technical standpoint" and I get that there is a lot more that goes into it than just the technical part.

Fair enough Lens. 

[MuggsyB]

Don't forget my friends that a Humpback Whale has a 50-55 foot vert.  Again, that's 600+:inches.  And keep in mind the human vert on land, let alone water. 

[MU82]

I think you could argue that Tom Brady was not always the best QB but he was always the best football player.  Aaron Rodgers IMO is the greatest QB of all time but I want Tom Brady in a championship game. 

I think a lot of people would argue that Brady was the best QB but might not be the best football player ever, giving that honor to the likes of Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or others who were all-time greats and also were far superior athletes to Brady.

These things are always fun discussions.

[WhiteTrash]

I think a lot of people would argue that Brady was the best QB but might not be the best football player ever, giving that honor to the likes of Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or others who were all-time greats and also were far superior athletes to Brady.

These things are always fun discussions.

I agree with this. I'd agree with Mike Greenberg statement that Brady might not be the best QB ever but he is the most accomplished player ever.

At the end of the day, I'd take the title of most accomplished in any career I picked; sports, business, charity, etc. 

[wadesworld]

Just look at what Brady did the one year he had an entirely elite WR. He had elite TEs almost his whole career, but overall his WRs were nothing special.

The difference with Brady was he’d take what the defense gave him. He could’ve put up bigger numbers, but if the gameplan was to run the ball 33 times he’d hand it off 33 times. You think Rodgers would ever do that? No chance. Not even Mahomes would, who I don’t think is as worried about numbers as Rodgers is.

[WhiteTrash]

To everyone on this thread. Thank you. This brings back great memories of being up late at MU with my buddies, and some beers, discussing "serious" topics like this. Great times that cement my love of MU and the people of MU.

[Hards Alumni]

Just look at what Brady did the one year he had an entirely elite WR. He had elite TEs almost his whole career, but overall his WRs were nothing special.

The difference with Brady was he’d take what the defense gave him. He could’ve put up bigger numbers, but if the gameplan was to run the ball 33 times he’d hand it off 33 times. You think Rodgers would ever do that? No chance. Not even Mahomes would, who I don’t think is as worried about numbers as Rodgers is.

Spot on.

[The Lens]

Just look at what Brady did the one year he had an entirely elite WR. He had elite TEs almost his whole career, but overall his WRs were nothing special.

The difference with Brady was he’d take what the defense gave him. He could’ve put up bigger numbers, but if the gameplan was to run the ball 33 times he’d hand it off 33 times. You think Rodgers would ever do that? No chance. Not even Mahomes would, who I don’t think is as worried about numbers as Rodgers is.

Totally agree.  I many ways Rodgers had everything it took to be the GOAT but his own ego kept him from reaching the highest heights.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I agree with this. I'd agree with Mike Greenberg statement that Brady might not be the best QB ever but he is the most accomplished player ever.

Kind of like the Dan Marino v. Joe Montana debates back in the 80s. In the end however, I think the accomplishments win out.  I don't hear Marino's name mentioned in these types of debates any longer.

[Uncle Rico]

Kind of like the Dan Marino v. Joe Montana debates back in the 80s. In the end however, I think the accomplishments win out.  I don't hear Marino's name mentioned in these types of debates any longer.

Which is kind of a shame?  Marino was awesome

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Which is kind of a shame?  Marino was awesome

He was, but I think him and Rodgers are going to go down similarly in history. Puts up great numbers with regular season accomplishments, but also a bunch of playoff losses when they were the higher seeded team. I think they lost twice in the AFC Championship Game at home, plus had a couple other home losses as well.

Rodgers had multiple MVPs and got a Super Bowl win however.

[warriorchick]

Wasn't Jackie Joyner Kersee up there in human track & field?

As opposed to manatee track and field?

[Coleman]

Spin off of Rico's 5 best baseball players, who do you have as GOATS in different sports?

Basketball: MJ
Football: Brady
Baseball: Shohei
Hockey: Wayneo
Golf: Tiger
Track & Field: Usain
Volleyball: Karch Kiraly
Soccer: Freddy Adu
Mountain Climbing: Alex Honnold
Swimming: Phelps
Tennis: Serena

Top 3 GOATS (relative dominance in their respective sport): Bolt, Phelps, Tiger

Idk how you can say Tiger when he has never topped Nicklaus' major record.

[Uncle Rico]

He was, but I think him and Rodgers are going to go down similarly in history. Puts up great numbers with regular season accomplishments, but also a bunch of playoff losses when they were the higher seeded team. I think they lost twice in the AFC Championship Game at home, plus had a couple other home losses as well.

Rodgers had multiple MVPs and got a Super Bowl win however.

I think Rodgers will rate higher easily because of the title and multiple MVPs.

The Fins lost in ‘86 to the Pats at home and ‘92 to a Bills team that was running on fumes and injured.  He was terrible in that game, too.

[Uncle Rico]

Idk how you can say Tiger when he has never topped Nicklaus' major record.

Deeper fields in the Tiger era

[Coleman]

My argument for Tiger would be, Tiger chased perfection and damn near achieved it.  Has every shot.  Nicklaus didn’t exclusively play left-to-right but didn’t change much through the years (of course, he didn’t have to).  Tiger was an engineer and artist.  His competition was much stronger and deeper, too.

Recency bias

[Coleman]

In the last 60 years, there are 3 instances of a player winning 5 (or more) PGA Tour starts in a row.

They belong to: Tiger Woods (7), Tiger Woods (6) and Tiger Woods (5).

Tiger is the only player since 1950 to win the same PGA Tour event four years in a row.

He’s done it twice (Buick Invitational 2005-08, Bay Hill 2000-03).

Tiger Woods has won 7 majors by 3 shots or more (most all-time).

From 2004-06, Tiger had 1,466 putts from 3 feet and in measured by ShotLink.

He missed three of them.

Tiger Woods is credited with 41 career European Tour wins, third-most all-time. He has never played full-time on that tour.

Tiger Woods is the only player currently under the age of 50 with 25 or more PGA Tour wins.

Woods won his 25th PGA Tour title more than 20 years ago (2001 at Bay Hill).

A few ridiculous Tiger stats from Justin Ray. Jack may have more majors, but he can’t touch Tiger’s dominance.

It’s not really even close.

That's all nice. But none of it matters as much as winning majors.

[Uncle Rico]

Recency bias

Not really.  The wave of international participation started as a trickle when Jack racked up his early majors.  Gary Player and Tony Jacklin come to mind.  Peter Thomson didn’t play the PGA and only played the US Open once.

By the end of Jack’s prime, the fields became much deeper as more international players began playing more on the tour and in all majors.  But even then, it wasn’t as global as it was in the Tiger era.

Tiger’s advantages were neutralized by equipment changes as well.  Jack’s greatest advantage was length and accuracy with the driver.  Tiger had that but lost it when drivers became frying pans and the ball quit spinning.  Today’s best ball strikers are at a disadvantage as well. 

Also, Tiger won 3 US Junior Amateurs and 3 Amateurs.  You’ll never see that again

[Hards Alumni]

That's all nice. But none of it matters as much as winning majors.

If that is how you're measuring the GOAT, that's fine, but I think plenty here disagree with that measurement being the only one.

[cheebs09]

He was, but I think him and Rodgers are going to go down similarly in history. Puts up great numbers with regular season accomplishments, but also a bunch of playoff losses when they were the higher seeded team. I think they lost twice in the AFC Championship Game at home, plus had a couple other home losses as well.

Rodgers had multiple MVPs and got a Super Bowl win however.

Marino was a terrible holder too. Most important kick and couldn’t turn the laces out. Cost them a Super Bowl and got their mascot stolen.

[WhiteTrash]

If that is how you're measuring the GOAT, that's fine, but I think plenty here disagree with that measurement being the only one.

I vote for Jack and Tom Brady for the same reasons.

If I picked Tiger, then I'd go with Payton in the NFL.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

If that is how you're measuring the GOAT, that's fine, but I think plenty here disagree with that measurement being the only one.

How do you measure yourself against other golfers?

By height.

[Coleman]

I vote for Jack and Tom Brady for the same reasons.

If I picked Tiger, then I'd go with Payton in the NFL.

Exactly. Winning the most at the highest level is the only metric that matters.

It is why MJ gets the nod over LeBron.

I am a huge Tiger fan, and I love what he brought to the game. He had a chance to be the GOAT, and maybe still does (?), but as of right now, he is not.

[Uncle Rico]

Exactly. Winning the most at the highest level is the only metric that matters.

It is why MJ gets the nod over LeBron.

Then I put Bill Russell above MJ and Otto Graham ahead of Tom Brady.

[Spotcheck Billy]

How do you measure yourself against other golfers?

By height.

this isn't the dad joke thread