Man in the Arena: Tom’s Glory.

[uscbucsfan]

I like the conversation because it makes you think about the factors leading to a Hall of Fame induction for players.

- peak/prime performance
- longevity
- playoff success
- accolades
- off-the-field factors

We know there’s no one way to get in. Eli Manning is going to get in because of his two Super Bowl wins. He played for a long time but he was never a top-five quarterback. You could argue if he was ever top 10. His brother Peyton also has two rings but is better known for unprecedented regular season domination. Jim Kelly was a five-time pro bowler who lost four Super Bowls. Never won an MVP unless we count the USFL years. 1x all pro.

It's going to be gross when Matt Ryan gets in despite only being a top 5 QB for a single year in his career. Numbers say that he'll get it.

[Max]

78-19 record (0.804)
27,585 YDS
212 TD
56 INT
102.2 passer rating 

2 Regular season MVPs 
2 Super Bowl appearances 
Only 16-0 regular season record in NFL history
2 All-Pros
6 Pro-Bowls

Same amount of division titles, double the amount of Super Bowl appearances and MVP awards than Marino. More TD passes than Aikman and Warner. Only down 5,000 to Aikman, Warner and Young in passing yards. 

That's a hall of fame career.

lol.

No it's not. That as a career in itself is not a HOF career. There's no reason to try to stretch his career.

You are trying to pick portions of other HOF careers to try to build your narrative. It doesn't work like that.

102.2 passer rating would rank 4th all-time. Elite-QB playing at an all-time great level, winning 2 MVPs in 7 years, carrying his team to the best record in NFL history (0.804). Two Super Bowl appearances. Winning the division and making the Pro-Bowl 6 out of 7 times.

Even among recent inductees, the only statistical category he would rank last in would be passing yards, and he isn't that far off there either.

That career makes the HOF 10 out of 10 times.

[nybf]

What you’re talking about is a hypothetical that has not happened yet. A player peaking fast, dominating for a few years to the tune of multiple MVPs, and retiring or getting hurt and retiring.

Kind of like Terrell Davis

[Snake]

What you’re talking about is a hypothetical that has not happened yet. A player peaking fast, dominating for a few years to the tune of multiple MVPs, and retiring or getting hurt and retiring.

Kind of like Terrell Davis

Close, except he only won one MVP.

[nybf]

Kind of like Terrell Davis

Close, except he only won one MVP.

Right. So your argument that your hypothetical would not make the HOF is that TD made the HOF with only 1 MVP?

Also seems weird that you're trying to discount a hypothetical with an even more ridiculous hypothetical.

[Snake]

Close, except he only won one MVP.

Right. So your argument that your hypothetical would not make the HOF is that TD made the HOF with only 1 MVP?

Also seems weird that you're trying to discount a hypothetical with an even more ridiculous hypothetical.

I’m not really tracking this. Terrell Davis has two Super Bowls wins and a SBMVP. It’s the opposite of the hypothetical we were talking about.

[Kress]

It's going to be gross when Matt Ryan gets in despite only being a top 5 QB for a single year in his career. Numbers say that he'll get it.

Somebody didn't get his cold call.

[Buc2]

Wtf are people even arguing here? LOL

[uscbucsfan]

Wtf are people even arguing here? LOL

An arbitrary period selected of Tom Brady's career and whether or not it's HOF worthy.

Offseason stuff.

[Buc2]

Wtf are people even arguing here? LOL

An arbitrary period selected of Tom Brady's career and whether or not it's HOF worthy.

Offseason stuff.

Okay. I'll play. I don't really see 3 HoF careers, but 2 for sure. Just split his, soon-to-be, 22 seasons smack dab in half (with the first 11 seasons in NE) and I'd say he would have made the HoF in either half.

[Snake]

An arbitrary period selected of Tom Brady's career and whether or not it's HOF worthy.

Offseason stuff.

Okay. I'll play. I don't really see 3 HoF careers, but 2 for sure. Just split his, soon-to-be, 22 seasons smack dab in half (with the first 11 seasons in NE) and I'd say he would have made the HoF in either half.

I think that’s correct. This year and next year have to be especially productive (in all ways) so the middle third era can be stretched out to include more seasons.

[Kress]

This year and next year have to be especially productive (in all ways) so the middle third era can be stretched out to include more seasons.

Sounds like a plan. Let's do it.

[Dread]

78-19 record (0.804)
27,585 YDS
212 TD
56 INT
102.2 passer rating 

2 Regular season MVPs 
2 Super Bowl appearances 
Only 16-0 regular season record in NFL history
2 All-Pros
6 Pro-Bowls

Same amount of division titles, double the amount of Super Bowl appearances and MVP awards than Marino. More TD passes than Aikman and Warner. Only down 5,000 to Aikman, Warner and Young in passing yards. 

That's a hall of fame career.

lol.

No it's not. That as a career in itself is not a HOF career.

Every multiple time winner is in the HOF.

This ^

It's tough to argue it wouldn't be a HoF resume when literally every player who has won MVP or even DPOY 2x (or more) is already in the HoF or will be get in once they are eligible. You'd have to explain why Brady would be the exception to what seems to be the rule for others.

It's crazy to say, but I would agree that Brady has had 3 different HoF caliber stretches in his 20yr NFL career.

[uscbucsfan]

It's tough to argue it wouldn't be a HoF resume when literally every player who has won MVP or even DPOY 2x (or more) is already in the HoF or will be get in once they are eligible.

29 out of 41 eligible former MVPs are in the HoF, so this isn't true.

[Dread]

It's tough to argue it wouldn't be a HoF resume when literally every player who has won MVP or even DPOY 2x (or more) is already in the HoF or will be get in once they are eligible.

29 out of 41 eligible former MVPs are in the HoF, so this isn't true.

Cool, but that's not what Max stated or what I commented on.

@Max posted "2 Regular season MVPs" for Brady over that span, for which I quoted and was commenting on (hence the "2x (or more)" in my post).

How many 2x MVPs (or DPOYs) are eligible for the HoF and not already in?

[Buc2]

29 out of 41 eligible former MVPs are in the HoF, so this isn't true.

Cool, but that's not what Max stated or what I commented on.

@Max posted "2 Regular season MVPs" for Brady over that span, for which I quoted and was commenting on (hence the "2x (or more)" in my post).

How many 2x MVPs (or DPOYs) are eligible for the HoF and not already in?

I checked it out and the only multi-MVP winners not in the HoF are not yet eligible (Brady & Rodgers).

[kaimaru]

Wait, I just saw this is 9 episodes. Does that mean it doesn't include his Super Bowl with us? Is that because there is already an hour long story on the Bucs and another on Arian?

[Primeminister]

Wait, I just saw this is 9 episodes. Does that mean it doesn't include his Super Bowl with us? Is that because there is already an hour long story on the Bucs and another on Arian?

That would be extremely disappointing. This last Super Bowl is narratively one of Tom’s best.

[Nobody]

As amazing as Tom is, it’s still as team a sport as it gets. He transcends it as much as humanly possible, but I still put the most dominant athletes I’ve ever seen as follows:

1 MJ
2 Tiger
3 Brady
4 Federer
5 Mayweather/Gretzky (toss-up)

I’ll put Brady at 3 because of his amazing ability to transcend the team nature of Football. But if he isn’t married to Belichick et al (and vice versa)? He’s not looking at 7.

MJ and Tiger were going to be MJ and Tiger.

Federer is interesting. He did what he did in the most competitive era (by miles) in the history of his sport. He played during the era of the second and third greatest of all time! Keep Djokovic and remove Nadal from the equation. He’s got like 7 more French Opens or something? What?! That is madness.

[uscbucsfan]

As amazing as Tom is, it’s still as team a sport as it gets. He transcends it as much as humanly possible, but I still put the most dominant athletes I’ve ever seen as follows:

1 MJ
2 Tiger
3 Brady
4 Federer
5 Mayweather/Gretzky (toss-up)

I’ll put Brady at 3 because of his amazing ability to transcend the team nature of Football. But if he isn’t married to Belichick et al (and vice versa)? He’s not looking at 7.

MJ and Tiger were going to be MJ and Tiger.

Federer is interesting. He did what he did in the most competitive era (by miles) in the history of his sport. He played during the era of the second and third greatest of all time! Keep Djokovic and remove Nadal from the equation. He’s got like 7 more French Opens or something? What?! That is madness.

This is all person opinion and there's no correct answer.

He's the GOAT, but he's not in the top 3 of best QBs I've seen. By that I mean just pure mastery of the position, making throws that no one else can make, command in the pocket, reading defense, etc. Peyton, Rodgers, and Marino were all better...I would probably add Mahomes to that list, too. He's even said as much about Rodgers and Manning, but his teams, Belichick, his consistency, health/refusal to age, the ability to elevate the team and himself in pressure situations are what make him the GOAT. So as others have separated GOAT from Best QB ever, I do as well.

MJ and Tiger are GOATs and by far the best I've ever seen...Maybe Gretzky as well. That's why I'd put Brady 3 or 4 on my multi-sport list.

Federer, IMO isn't close as a guy in his era in Djokovic, has already surpassed him.

As far as greatest football player I've ever watched...I'd have to go with Ed Reed or Barry Sanders, but more than pure talent goes into a greatest argument.

[Snake]

Peak Federer didn’t seem to perfectly overlap with his rivals’ peaks, like Djokovic. In some ways, this does Federer a disservice because he wasn’t at his best when his ATG rivals were. I was a little too young/uninterested to see Roger at his absolute best which was early-mid 2000s right? My overall impression is that player is generally seen as 1A or 1B for all time peak. I’ll always love Roger the person. But my biggest memories of him are all losses. The 2008 Wimbledon against Nadal. When they were both wearing white looking like angels. A couple years back against Djokovic at Wimbledon. where Federer had Djokovic down to match point TWICE on serve and Djokovic won.

Now on the subject of Djokovic. I think he’s the best ever that I’ve seen but again, maybe he narrowly avoided peak Federer who I missed.

[Nobody]

Interesting take but I don’t agree on Djokovic.

His ascension in the last 10 years is when Federer is in retirement phase for the historical majority of tennis players; 30+. Federer’s prime is the aughts. The fact that Federer won 7 Majors and an Olympics outside of his prime and during Djokovic’s prime (2nd best player all time imo) enhances Federer’s greatness. It doesn’t detract from it.

It’s also the reason why MJ is such an unparalleled freak. That 2nd Bulls run was well out of his physical prime and during an era of several of the greatest of all time. He shut down a Houston dynasty. Killed any pretension to dynasty for the absolutely stacked Suns/Blazers/Sonics/Knicks/Pacers/Jazz. Delayed a Spurs dynasty.

It’s hard to imagine ever seeing a combination of utterly freakish athlete in every way (not just unparalleled linear explosiveness, but freakish body control, loose hips/explosive change of direction, unreal coordination and proprioception and power: weight ratio), perfection of fundamentals, off-ball and on-ball IQ and instincts (both ends of the floor), raw dimensions and (in particular) indices, combined with the most pathological mental make up possible for an athletes driven to success.

I’d imagine Sugar Ray Robinson was similar, but I can’t say (I’ve read a lot and watched footage but I don’t know).

* Federer’s game was beautiful and easy yet explosive and filled with “wtf did I just see?” like MJ’s.

[uscbucsfan]

Peak Federer didn’t seem to overlap with his rivals’ peaks, like Djokovic. In some ways, this does Federer a disservice because he wasn’t at his best when his ATG rivals were. I was a little too young/uninterested to see Roger at his absolute best. My overall impression is that player is seen as 1A or 1B for all time peak. I always love Roger the person. But my biggest memories of him are all losses. The 2008 Wimbledon against Nadal. When they were both wearing white looking like angels. A couple years back against Djokovic. when Federer had Djokovic down to match point TWICE and Djokovic didn’t lose.

Now on the subject of Djokovic. I think he’s the best ever that I’ve seen but again, maybe he narrowly avoided peak Federer.

Nadal beating Federer as often as he did diminished him...Djokovic surpassing him during his playing time, although outside of his peak also diminishes his career a bit. The three are likely the top 3 tennis players ever, but them all being in the relative era hurts them.

It's a little like we are seeing in the NBA. LeBron was being compared to Jordan for years, but now he's being compared to Curry and his impact on the game...and many former players are saying Curry is a more significant historical player...and because of that, I see more and more putting Kobe (a lot due to his death) above LeBron. LeBron is also HATED, so that factors in as well.

Having 2 (or more) transcendent players playing together drops them down a bit to many...it's not completely logical or fair, but Magic and Bird (Same with Messi/Ronaldo, etc.) hurt each other on their all-time rankings IMO.

Rankings are often not completely logical, emotionally weighed lists...just as mine is. It's why the older the generation, the less likely they will be high on the list outside of Babe Ruth, who most put as the number 1 person across all sports, even though most never saw him play.

[uscbucsfan]

* Federer’s game was beautiful and easy yet explosive and filled with “wtf did I just see?” like MJ’s.

This is true and outside of clay courts, he was completely dominant.

[uscbucsfan]

In before someone bitches about us talking tennis, lol.

[Noles1724]

[Kress]

For me, it's like this: In the team sport context, there are a few players who you watch and you feel like the game is different for them. They play at a different mental speed, almost as if they can just put everyone around them in slow motion - or, at times, pause - so they can manipulate and do whatever they please.

The poster child for that will always be MJ. Before any of us knew what the Matrix was, it looked like he was operating in it. He could seemingly be in mid air, about to do something, but then change his mind about what he wanted to do in response to anything anyone was doing around him - or just because he felt like it. He was "Air" Jordan not because he jumped higher or farther than anyone else, but because it just FELT like he had an eternity up there to decide what to do, then manipulate his body into doing it. The game looked easy because he was on a different mental speed.

Few others have stood out to me like that, and as far as the NFL is concerned, Brady is not one of them. But Rodgers is. Brady, Manning, etc., they are/were masters of pre-snap. Rodgers is the guy who, once the ball has been snapped, can hit the slow-mo button and make it look like he's playing with a different clock.

[Nobody]

If Rodgers had Brady/Payton/Brees presnap capabilities and Brady's mental makeup, he would be Jordan.

He's a hair below those 3 presnap and he's miles behind Brady in terms of mental makeup (Brady doesn't have a Jay Cutler bone in his body...he's all Jordan and Tiger upstairs...Rodgers has 2 or 3 Jay Cutler bones in his body and that is 2 or 3 too many).

[Buc2]

As amazing as Tom is, it’s still as team a sport as it gets. He transcends it as much as humanly possible, but I still put the most dominant athletes I’ve ever seen as follows:

1 MJ
2 Tiger
3 Brady
4 Federer
5 Mayweather/Gretzky (toss-up)

I’ll put Brady at 3 because of his amazing ability to transcend the team nature of Football. But if he isn’t married to Belichick et al (and vice versa)? He’s not looking at 7.

MJ and Tiger were going to be MJ and Tiger.

Federer is interesting. He did what he did in the most competitive era (by miles) in the history of his sport. He played during the era of the second and third greatest of all time! Keep Djokovic and remove Nadal from the equation. He’s got like 7 more French Opens or something? What?! That is madness.

This is all person opinion and there's no correct answer.

He's the GOAT, but he's not in the top 3 of best QBs I've seen. By that I mean just pure mastery of the position, making throws that no one else can make, command in the pocket, reading defense, etc. Peyton, Rodgers, and Marino were all better...I would probably add Mahomes to that list, too. He's even said as much about Rodgers and Manning, but his teams, Belichick, his consistency, health/refusal to age, the ability to elevate the team and himself in pressure situations are what make him the GOAT. So as others have separated GOAT from Best QB ever, I do as well.

MJ and Tiger are GOATs and by far the best I've ever seen...Maybe Gretzky as well. That's why I'd put Brady 3 or 4 on my multi-sport list.

Federer, IMO isn't close as a guy in his era in Djokovic, has already surpassed him.

As far as greatest football player I've ever watched...I'd have to go with Ed Reed or Barry Sanders, but more than pure talent goes into a greatest argument.

I agree that Sanders was damned good. Emmitt Smith was another. I'd say they were GOAT1A & GOAT1B. Jim Brown was maybe the best during my lifetime but I was just a kid during his career and don't really remember ever seeing him play. He retired when I was just 7 y.o. Still, looking at his stats, he would be, at worst, GOAT1C. His last year playing he had 1544 yards and 17 TDs with another 328 yards and 4 TDs receiving. His 1544 yards were the 2nd most in his 9 seasons. Wow! Sanders had 1491 yards but only 3 TDs with 289 yards & 3 TDs receiving his final year.

[Buc2]

I grew up watching guys like Conners, McEnroe and Borg play tennis. Those guys were damned good, but Federer would have wiped up the courts with them.

[BLT]

As amazing as Tom is, it’s still as team a sport as it gets. He transcends it as much as humanly possible, but I still put the most dominant athletes I’ve ever seen as follows:

1 MJ
2 Tiger
3 Brady
4 Federer
5 Mayweather/Gretzky (toss-up)

I’ll put Brady at 3 because of his amazing ability to transcend the team nature of Football. But if he isn’t married to Belichick et al (and vice versa)? He’s not looking at 7.

MJ and Tiger were going to be MJ and Tiger.

Federer is interesting. He did what he did in the most competitive era (by miles) in the history of his sport. He played during the era of the second and third greatest of all time! Keep Djokovic and remove Nadal from the equation. He’s got like 7 more French Opens or something? What?! That is madness.

I like the list but I'd put Tiger over MJ

[BJJ34]

How many people in the 18-35 age bracket call Jordan the GOAT of sports, but only have watched highlights?

Tiger is the most dominant athlete I’ve seen. He had people defeated on the course before they even started. Going into tourneys thinking they had no chance.

Federer and Nadal both lived at the same time, same with Joker. Hard to really talk about them being GOATs when all of them were individually dominant at different times.

[Nobody]

How many people in the 18-35 age bracket call Jordan the GOAT of sports, but only have watched highlights?

Tiger is the most dominant athlete I’ve seen. He had people defeated on the course before they even started. Going into tourneys thinking they had no chance.

Federer and Nadal both lived at the same time, same with Joker. Hard to really talk about them being GOATs when all of them were individually dominant at different times.

1) I don’t know how often it happens, but lucky for me, I’m not one of those folks! Born in the most basketball state in the union in ‘77 (and played it through this day), watched the UNC Natl Championship when Jordan hit the winner, watched the Olympics after, spent my youth watching Cubs, Sox, Bulls games on WGN. I saw everything Jordan start to finish.

2) If you didn’t see those late 80s to late 90s Bulls teams, “The Beatles” phenomenon was a real thing. The other thing that was real was the (justified) deification and fear of the spector in real time by his own peers. And that last thing that was real was “the will vs the wilt” (just like Tiger later). Opposition would absolutely crumble before games were even played. Everyone knew what was going to happen.

3) It’s interesting, but in the throes of it, one of the primary defining factors for both MJ and Federer was something that was held against Tiger; level of competition.

The 80s were filled with 4 of the greatest teams of all time (76ers, Celtics, Lakers, Pistons) and the 90s were loaded with would-be-dynasties and just a deluge of incredible players (particularly defenders).

Federer’s unprecedented all-court resume was haunted by the greatest clay court player of all time and 2nd greatest all time until mid/late teens (when Djokovic took that crown). Meanwhile, Fed’s outside his prime run (like Brady’s 2nd career) alone would have put him as a top 4 all time despite playing in the reign of Jokic when Fed’s was in his 30s (historically retirement age).

Meanwhile, as much as I love him, Tiger’s run saw nothing like the talent we see today. Overwhelmingly, you had 1 youthful challenger in Sergio, a Duval collapse, and a late prime Phil/Els/Westwood/Furyk + old guys in DL3, Singh, Monty.

Not exactly the murderers row of youthful talent we see today. Golf was struggling mightily at the time for new talent. “The Tiger Effect” is directly responsible for the avalanche of greatness we see today.

I have no doubt Tiger would have dominated these guys today like he did back then…but lack of viable foils is definitely a thing when talking about GOATs.

[Snake]

There’s like four players who have a legitimate argument for basketball GOAT and one’s opinion on who that is seems to correlate pretty heavily with which one they grew up watching. Might be the case for all sports, but I’ve seen this a lot with basketball fans.

[nybf]

There’s like four players who have a legitimate argument for basketball GOAT