Support NeoGAF

[Agent Icebeezy]

I like bringing this up to various people from time to time, you get interesting views. Something I'm sure I'll get here.

Greats like Barry Sanders, Charles Barkley, a Barry Bonds got all the accolades that they could ever need, yet they never got rings. They reach the pinnacle of singular achievement

Stacey King, Jack Haley, among many others scrubs had non-descript careers, but at one in time, they were champions. They reach the pinnacle of their profession, in a team sense.

 

[Moose]

Whats your point? That the champions should be getting more recognition? They are probably people that anyone else could fill in at and the team could still win a championship, so...

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

Whats your point? That the champions should be getting more recognition? They are probably people that anyone else could fill in at and the team could still win a championship, so...

Dude, what the hell are you talking about? :lol :lol :lol

Would you rather go throughout your career with all the admiration in the world, but never win the big one? Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, Dan Marino etc.

Or

Would you like to look at your career in retrospect, knowing that you were a world champion and won a ring. EVen if you were nothing but a role player

 

[Excess Poo Flakes]

Both

 

[iapetus]

Would you rather go throughout your career with all the admiration in the world, but never win the big one? Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, Dan Marino, Peyton Manning etc.

Fixed.

 

[Moose]

Oh. I was confused what you were bringing up/asking. :-|


Hall of Fame over a championship. It's saying you're one of the best ever. That's just... good.


Edit: :lol @ Peyton Manning, that may make me rethink my answer :lol

 

[bionic77]

Would you rather go throughout your career with all the admiration in the world, but never win the big one? Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, Dan Marino etc.

One of these does not belong...

 

[Shinobi]

:lol

It's a really tough call...a championship I guess is something you fought for and earned, while induction into a hall of fame is recognition by peers/and or people who cover the game, which is pretty important as well. Most people I believe say the ring just because it's the safe and politically correct thing to say, but I really don't know which one I'd find more satisfying.

Guess I'll just play it safe and say the ring. :lol

 

[NintendosBooger]

Hall of Fame.

Having a ring is the result of strong team effort. There are a bunch of no-name players out there with championship rings -- how many of us will remember the starting offensive line for the Bucs and Patriots in a decade or two? How many of them do you think actually get endorsement deals?

I'd rather be recognized as a "Barry Sanders" than be any one of those guys.

 

[Shinobi]

I don't know...Jon Salley's name is brought up constantly, though it's for less flattering reasons ("How the fuck did that bum scoop up six rings?!?"). But generally speaking, your point has merit.

And frankly I've never looked down on an athlete for not winning a ring anyway, unless they constantly cost their teams chances to advance in big games.So much of an athlete winning a championship comes down to luck, being in the right place at the right time. But a hall of fame career means you were consistently great for the long hall...no luck there, unless hall entry requirements are weak (witness the Hockey Hall of Fame).

 

[Lucky Forward]

Reminds me of when the Colts lost their last playoff game this past season, and afterwards Boomer Esaison said something like, "Peyton Manning is in danger of becoming the Dan Marino of the new millenium"...with a fuming Dan Marino sitting right next to him. :lol