Can A Player be the Best Ever and Not Have a Ring? | Page 5 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Can A Player be the Best Ever and Not Have a Ring?

Driven said:
I think it is a great debate, but people just use bad examples. Like you just did again. Bledsoe got his ring as a backup, that statement was just moronic. People are not just talking about one ring here, Montana won 4! Can you name another player, nevermind QB that has 4? If Montana won 1 or 2 then this debate would not be even close. The Dilfer example just makes no sense.

I really do not have an opinion either way, I just hate the Dilfer example.
Click to expand...

The dilfer example show how DUMB it is to say that Montana is better because he won SB rings that he didn't win himself! If it wasn't for the team then he wouldn't have won those rings! The Dilfer example is very extreme but if you are to rate a position you can't make the argument that Montana is better because of him winner rings then turn around and say the argument doesn't work with someone else! It should be judged on stats not team achievments! You want a better one then we can use a STARTER that has 2 rings and use your argument to show how dumb it is and say Brady is a better QB because he has won 2 rings!
 
shalafi3455 said:
The dilfer example show how DUMB it is to say that Montana is better because he won SB rings that he didn't win himself! If it wasn't for the team then he wouldn't have won those rings! The Dilfer example is very extreme but if you are to rate a position you can't make the argument that Montana is better because of him winner rings then turn around and say the argument doesn't work with someone else! It should be judged on stats not team achievments! You want a better one then we can use a STARTER that has 2 rings and use your argument to show how dumb it is and say Brady is a better QB because he has won 2 rings!
Click to expand...

Ok so now you are comparing a guy who has only played 3 seasons to a guy who played almost two decades. You see the only reason this debate is so good because other than Montana, there is no one who matches up to Marino

Marino had great individual success with above average team success.
Montana had great team success with above average individual success(but those 3 SB MVP's could put him into great success).

That's why it is a good debate, because they were so great they are the only two that can match up with one another.
 
Driven said:
Ok so now you are comparing a guy who has only played 3 seasons to a guy who played almost two decades. You see the only reason this debate is so good because other than Montana, there is no one who matches up to Marino

Marino had great individual success with above average team success.
Montana had great team success with above average individual success(but those 3 SB MVP's could put him into great success).

That's why it is a good debate, because they were so great they are the only two that can match up with one another.
Click to expand...

I do agree they are both great! The problem I have is rating a position by how many rings someone won! Now your the first one to bring up MVP's if you want to use that I can understand a little more! That is an individual achievment where rings aren't! That is my thing if you want to rate a position do it by individual stats or achievments not team achievments! I do like the MVP thing that's a good example!

Your right the other analigies are off base but that's my feeling on rating a player by rings!

Either way ours posts have been jumping with just this thread alone! :D
 
shalafi3455 said:
I do agree they are both great! The problem I have is rating a position by how many rings someone won! Now your the first one to bring up MVP's if you want to use that I can understand a little more! That is an individual achievment where rings aren't! That is my thing if you want to rate a position do it by individual stats or achievments not team achievments! I do like the MVP thing that's a good example!

Your right the other analigies are off base but that's my feeling on rating a player by rings!

Either way ours posts have been jumping with just this thread alone! :D
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
shalafi3455 said:
I guess that means ever QB with a ring is better than any QB ever to play without one! In your words you would have to take the guy that has won it! Thanks I understand now! Your right I would rather have Trent Dilfer over Marino any day! If your going to use it for one I guess you would have to use it for them all! Thanks for setting me straight! I feel better now! :up:
Click to expand...
Reading comprehension is clearly not your strong-suit :shakeno:
 
Dude that sig hurts! Sweet pic thou

clear.gif
 
shalafi3455 said:
Dude that sig hurts! Sweet pic thou

clear.gif
Click to expand...

Yes that is sweet. I am starting to like this year's ring better than 2001 after seeing that pic..
 
Driven said:
Yes that is sweet. I am starting to like this year's ring better than 2001 after seeing that pic..
Click to expand...

Yea I would have to agree! This pic is much better than the first one you had found! They are both nice though!

My Avatar is still the best one though! :up: :bling:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom