Can a player with no rings be the GOAT?
craig44
Posts: 11,255 ✭✭✭✭✭
So the brady discussion led me to post this. Can a ringless player be the GOAT in any team sport? I would say absolutely yes. Rings are a team accomplishment. Being the GOAT is an individual feat. Thoughts? Examples? How about ted williams, ty cobb, nap. Lajoie, Dan Marino, barry sanders, Randy moss, Barry bonds for a few examples.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
0
Comments
Don't get me started on Barry Sanders. Smith is the best RB until somebody passes him in yards gained.
Randy Moss was great, but was he better than Rice???? Barry Bonds is NOT near the top of anything but cheating!
It's really hard to say who was the best of anything because there is so much to take into consideration. And winning championships is part of it.
I watched emmitts whole career. He was amazing . But barry, he was a transcendent talent. What he could have done running behind that Dallas o line
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Barry > Emmitt
I'm not diminishing what Emmitt did, however it's tough to say some of his production was due to the quality of his line. Barry, however, my goodness.....has was said above, he transcended the sport and the position!
I can't edit. I meant to say "....was NOT due...."
The OL only gets you 1 or 2 yards........the rest is the RB talent. I'll stick with Emmitt.
How About Marino. Who was better passer than him? His records stood for many years. He threw almost 100 more tds than the next guy when he retired . Under today's rules he would do even better. Not his fault the dolphins defense was so poor and he never had a running game to open up more passing lanes
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
1 or 2 yards? So, are your LBs playing **right **behind the defensive line? Nonsense.
You just made my case. Who beats the LB's.......the RB....that's who. The OL makes the hole then the RB's talent takes over.
This is where you get downright silly.
Smith rushed for 3,000 more yards then Sanders and had 1400 more attempts. Do the math.
Sanders averaged 5.0 yards per carry. Smith 4.2 yards per carry.
Smith padded his stats for 5 years. His last 3 with Dallas and his final two in Arizona. Sanders went out on top. His way. Smith was a shell of his former great self.
Emmitt was great. Sanders was electric. Smith was vanilla and Barry was the other 30 favors.
Imagine what Emmits career would have looked like on the Lions? Imagine what Sanders career would have looked like in Dallas. Yikes. They would need a whole record book just for him.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Marino was a terrific QB. Has to be Top 6 of all time
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
You can have Sanders. I'll take Smith with Brown or Cambell as second choice. I would take Dorsett over Sanders.
Who would you rank above Marino mark?most people rank montana above him. Usually due in some part to the 4 rings. If you wonder why Montana's passer rating is a few points higher than marinos, I think it is largely due to the systems theyplayed in. Montana used the west coast offense which used lots of short safe passes in the flat to rbs and wideouts. San fran receivers seemed to always lead the league in yac. Marino used a much more vertical attack with more risky downfield throws. If the two changed systems, Ithink Marino comes out on top as he had a quicker release and was still more accurate on downfield throws. This same argument could go for any west coast qb including Steve young.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I only saw Brown in grainy black and white films, though all the stories I hear, he was a man amongst boys. I will defer to brown as number 1. Of all the rbs I saw, Sanders was far and away the most dynamic. He could do things in the open field no one else could. I watched dozens of times when he was stopped for losses because his line failed him. No one I ever saw could do more with those 1-2 yards the Dallas ol could provide than barry. Another ringless rb who gets little credit is Eric dickerson. the guy was a beast. His body failed him during the second half of his career due to overuse, but the guy was amazing
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
1 and 1A Montana & Brady
3 Manning
4-6 in any order and it wouldn't bother me. Elway, Marino & Unitas
7 Young
8 Farve
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Mark....hard to argue with any of those, but I would like to see Roger S. in there.
Mark, other than rings, what makes you place brady and montana over manning and Marino?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
DM, this is about as inaccurate as anything you've posted, lol..
Sanders was better than Smith. Smith was great, but even an average back would have put up exceptional numbers on that team.
I'm not a Bonds fan, personally, but no question he was the best player of his generation, even without the PEDs. With them, he is arguably greater than any player other than Babe Ruth.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Marino had seasons with the "Killer B's" which was a good defense. I think you are over playing that song & dance.
Some of these debates get a little silly.......especially when you start putting down QB's like Aikman and Bradshaw because they were on great teams. It doesn't matter how good the receivers are if the QB can't read the defense and put the ball on the right guy.
Dolphins not only had weak defenses for much of Marino's career, they also had no running game for much of that time, either.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Why is this so inaccurate? How does the OL help you once the RB has broken thru the line and is in the secondary. Everybody is always talking about a RB's quickness and vision and being able to make people miss.
And there is no way you will ever win me over on Sanders being better than Smith. You might as well quit trying. Like I have said before there are at least 10 RB's I would rather have than Sanders. And right now Zeke is one more.
I saw them all play. A lot
One drive to win a game. Brady or Montana is my pick. Heck I would take Brady at QB for that last drive with keets at TE and you and Dimeman at WR. A lot of times he didn't have much better then that.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
DM, cmon man, if you don't understand why the OL is a fundamental part to the success of the running game, I don't know what to tell you. Ask any coach or person involved in the game and listen to what they tell you.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
He leaves me speechless sometimes. Sometimes I think he is just messing with us.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Come on guys. No where did I say the OL does not make the running game. You have to have the blocking and a hole to go thru. Once this is done and the RB is into the second line of defense this is where the talent of the RB comes in. Why is this so hard to understand??
Because without the OL opening up the holes to run through you don't get to the second level. Sanders had to make his own holes for several years. Barry ran for his dear life almost every time he got the ball. You just said the Cowboys of the 90's were the best team ever. They had a great OL, a great TE, a great WR and a great QB and Emmit. The Lions had none of that. They had give the ball to Barry and let him run for his life.
If Barry got to the second level untouched he would still be running
Emmit was excellent don't get me wrong. Barry was special
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I think part of what we are saying about the ol is that somewhat often sanders ol didn't open any holes and they couldn't get him those 2 yards to get him into the secondary. If he had a line as strong as Dallas, and been able to get into the secondary more often he would have racked up even more yards
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It's also virtually impossible to gain positive yardage as a ball carrier if you are hit behind the line of scrimmage or as soon as the ball is handed to you. The Dallas OL from the 1990s was arguably the best ever. Smith was the beneficiary of that as I'm sure he'd also tell you. Smith was a tremendous back in his own right but Sanders was pure magic as a ball carrier
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Some of the poor running game is the fault of Marino. His footwork and technique in the running game were terrible. He was painfully slow and had trouble with anything wide. He also held the ball very far away from his body, thus exposing the play and hampering his running backs.
Beyond that, the guy played almost 20 years. Do we really think they never had a single decent back in that time? No way.
A running back yes. A QB, no way.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Putting Smith above Sanders is just about as silly as me saying Otto Graham was the best QB ever.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
Tony Nathan, Sammie Smith, Lorenzo Hampton, Mark higgs, Terry Kirby, Bernie parmalee, Karin Abdul jabar, Lawrence phillips and Cecil Collins. That is the list of all pro rbs Marino played with over his 17 years. Jabar recorded the only 1000 yard season when he averaged a Herculean 3.6 yards per carry. Still think he had a great rb over his 17 year career tabe?
As far as him being slow, I will give you that, mostly over thesecond half of his career after the Achilles injury, but he was no slower than brady. As far as footwork, you are plain wrong on that one. I watched marinos entire career. No one had better footwork or mechanics than him.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I personally would prefer a guy like Chuck Muncie over Barry Sanders. It's impossible to overestimate the value associated with being guaranteed 2 yards every time an rb totes the rock, compared to a mercurial runner who is just as likely to lose 5 as he is to take one 90 to the house.
I would love to know D-man's thoughts on this.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
not the Greatest of All-Time but certainly in the conversation, Gale Sayers never came close to a title as a member of the Bears. to that end, Walter Payton almost followed the same path.
I agree. I think Sanders holds the record for plays losing yards. Give me Smith or Brown or Cambell or a bunch of others any day. Sanders running the ball was a circus waiting for something bad to happen. Give me a North South runner who is hard to bring down.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
I see what you did there, Stephen, lol.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Barry Sanders -he could make guys miss him in a phone booth. he was a once in generation player who deserved better than Wayne Fontes and Scott Mitchell (or whoever the Lions quarterback was).
Emmitt was a fine player and durable but I would take Sanders every time. You didn't want to miss a play when Sanders was on the field because you might miss something unforgettable.
On quarterbacks, I would move Favre up a bit on Mark's list and I believe Rodgers belongs on the list somewhere.
As far as clutch quarterback, I have to go with Elway. As a Chiefs fan, I had to watch some of those ridiculous comebacks. Elway had the ability to play lousy for three and a half quarters and play out of his mind for the last four minutes
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
How much of elways mediocre early year stats were due to Dan Reeves conservative playcalling? When Denver would fall behind in the fourth quarter, he would then set elway loose to finish the game. He had much better stats latter in his career when shannahan took over.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Yup, played not to lose, rather than to win. We dealt with plenty of that in Seattle with stinkin' Mike Holmgren
That went right over your head like a scud missle
Well played Galaxy. He bit like a vampire at a blood bank
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
All he stated was the truth.
There will never be another Barry Sanders, plain and simple. The other night, some analyst suggested that Leveon Bell was comparable to Barry Sanders. Bell is a fine back but I am sorry, I don't see it. Barry Sanders had over 2600 yards his Heisman season. Every defense knew what was coming and Sanders still scored 39 touchdowns and averaged 7.6 yds/carry. I had the "privilege" of watching him get over 300 yards against an admittedly terrible K-State team. But he put up unbelievable numbers against great defenses like Oklahoma and Nebraska.
I saw Emmitt Smith play in person, I saw Thurman Thomas in person, I saw Elway too many times in person. The most spectacular player I ever saw in person was Barry Sanders.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Please note that I said "decent" running back, not great. The Denver Broncos proved you can get great production out of decent running backs - something Miami failed to do.
As for mechanics, again, talking just running game here. Throwing the ball, Marino was peerless. In the running game, he stunk. Holding the ball waaaaaaaaay out from his body on handoffs, being too slow for wide runs, etc.
Having seen QB's since Namath, the one thing that has always stuck in my memory was the quick release that Marino had. In that regard Dan always brought to my mind Joe with their respective quick releases.
I would say that Denver won the Super Bowl last year on the backs of the defense, in spite of their offense, which was downright dismal at times. The Miami defense, on average, during Marino's career was markedly worse than Denver's, which is a significant disadvantage for the Fins (in addition to having no viable running game). I would also say that the RB tandem of Anderson and Hillman last season was a very good one.
It's not Marino's fault that Miami never had a bonafide #1 back throughout his career. The list of backs he played with was mediocre at best. Marino was the Miami offense for the most part and the reason the Dolphins were even relevant many seasons during that time.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
There is no doubt that Marino was a great QB. I don't remember all their SB appearances, but one of their losses was to a very good 49'er team.
DM -Marino went to the Super Bowl his second season (where the Niners blew them out). Weeks after the game, Marino and Montana did a Diet Pepsi commercial that suggested that they would meet again in the Super Bowl. Sadly for Marino, he never made it back.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
The Niners were hard to beat back then........but the Cowboys did it often.
The Cowboys were good back then................until they lost to the Steelers in 2 Super Bowls..
I was talking the 90's. That second loss in the 70's you needed the help of the refs.