|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Nov 29, 2019 3:28:03 GMT
Depends on the sport. Cricket: absolutely. Don't even have to go back that far. Take Andrew Flintoff out of England's 2005 Ashes team and it would have been at least 3-1 Australia, if not 3 or 4 to nil. Basketball is another one. In other sports some players have team changing influence either from professionalism and leadership off the field or courage and determination on it. Not necessarily the best players, but Talismanic figures who embody a team or style of play and the team is simply night and day between when they play and when they don't. Not even that far back. Take Ben Stokes out of the Cricket World Cup, and England don’t win it. One of the most famous Australian examples was Andrew Johns and the Knights. But Basketball is the obvious answer here. LeBron, Kobe, Jordan, Olajuwon, Reggie Miller, Drexler, Wilkins and Dr J are all examples, I as a casual basketball fan, know of the top of my head.
|
|
njcardfan
Sophomore
@njcardfan
Posts: 628
Likes: 353
 
|
Post by njcardfan on Nov 29, 2019 3:53:52 GMT
So I was rewatching my copy of the awesome epic The Natural last night. And the baseball team the NY Knights are really awful. That is until Roy Hobbes comes along with his magic bat, Wonderboy, and his talent. All of a sudden it's like all the other players wake up from their deep slumber and bounce back and turn the team around into winners. Of course one player can be the leading scorer and make the defensive plays but it will take others to contribute and be good players for the team to win. Yeah, I know The Natch is fiction but has anything like this ever happened in real life where one really good player comes along and turns the light switch on for the team to rally back and win games? Is one example Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls? I rewatched The Natural last weekend after discussing the soundtrack on here. Superb film. You notice the strong similarities to Superman? Father dies of a heart attack out on the farm, then the tree literally glows when it's been hit by lightening beckoning him out in the night - just like the glowing kryptonite. Then he leaves the farm behind to try and make it in the city. He is a completely incorruptible force of good, who goes on to become a saviour. Love it. Also think it's almost a supernatural tale as well, always with the lightening... As for real life equivalents - I always go with Maradona and in particular Italia 90. They didn't win but he dragged a very underwhelming Argentina side far beyond what they should have been able to achieve. Change Superman to Odysseus and you have something(hint: The Natural is based off of the Odyssey).
|
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Nov 29, 2019 7:07:01 GMT
Brady actually is a poor example. When Brady was out in 2008, the Pats went 11-5 with Matt Cassell. And when Brady was suspended for cheating in DeflateGate, the Pats went 3-1 with Jimmy Garappolo and Jacoby Brissett. So without Brady, the Pats still have a 70% winning percentage. So Brady doesn't really make a difference. It's really Matt Walsh and Jim "The Deflator" McNally that made the difference. With Tom Brady 2008 - The Patriot become the first and only NFL team to ever go undefeated during a 16 game regular season. Without Tom Brady - A drop off of 30% the next year and the Pats miss the play-offs for the first time in over a decade. Without Tom Brady 2016 - 75% win percentage. With Tom Brady 2016 - 93% win percentage and the greatest Super Bowl come back victory in NFL history. With Matt Walsh - 70% win percentage. Three World Championships. After Matt Walsh - 78% win percentage. Six more trips to the Super Bowl, three more World Championships. With Jim McNally - 75% win percentage. Two trips to the Super Bowl. After Jim McNally - 86% win percentage. Four trips to the Super Bowl in five years and three more World Championships. Now, I understand that a Brady-less Patriots must look real good to a Cowboys fan*, but Brady obviously makes the difference between being good, and being the greatest. *  You are just being a homer who is reaching with your pick of Tommy Boy which is not really all that surprising since Boston fans are so passionate about their teams that they get obnoxious with their defense of them and are not humble enough to admit their faults. Weren't the Pats already sorta/kinda a team that was getting better just before Brady? Weren't they climbing up the cellar steps? They at least did have one SB appearance that lost to my Packers with an offense led by Favre and a defense led by Reggie. See what I did there? Gave credit to both sides of the ball and in football that is what it takes for a winning team and why there would be more than one player who makes a difference. Now you could argue that they built a better team to support Brady but that would be reaching at making him a difference maker. And then there is the whole cheating controversy that doesn't help his reputation either. I also have to take issue with you calling them "World Champions" since football is also played in Canada. Did the Pats beat a Canadian team to rightfully get that title? Nope. They beat an American team therefore they are nothing more than American Cheating Champions. The only ones of a sport that can rightfully call themselves World Champions are the winners of the World Cup for soccer such as the winning women's team from America which means that they are superior to the Patriots in that regard.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 29, 2019 10:05:57 GMT
With Tom Brady 2008 - The Patriot become the first and only NFL team to ever go undefeated during a 16 game regular season. Without Tom Brady - A drop off of 30% the next year and the Pats miss the play-offs for the first time in over a decade. Without Tom Brady 2016 - 75% win percentage. With Tom Brady 2016 - 93% win percentage and the greatest Super Bowl come back victory in NFL history. With Matt Walsh - 70% win percentage. Three World Championships. After Matt Walsh - 78% win percentage. Six more trips to the Super Bowl, three more World Championships. With Jim McNally - 75% win percentage. Two trips to the Super Bowl. After Jim McNally - 86% win percentage. Four trips to the Super Bowl in five years and three more World Championships. Now, I understand that a Brady-less Patriots must look real good to a Cowboys fan*, but Brady obviously makes the difference between being good, and being the greatest. * Weren't the Pats already sorta/kinda a team that was getting better just before Brady? The Patriots have had much more success with Brady than Bledsoe. ... which was exactly the point I was making. Take it up with the NFL, snowflake. That's the official title of the Super Bowl winner, since forever. I'm sure they will give your complaint all the attention it deserves.
|
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Nov 29, 2019 17:53:30 GMT
Weren't the Pats already sorta/kinda a team that was getting better just before Brady? The Patriots have had much more success with Brady than Bledsoe. ... which was exactly the point I was making. Take it up with the NFL, snowflake. That's the official title of the Super Bowl winner, since forever. I'm sure they will give your complaint all the attention it deserves. And the point I'm making is that in football the credit is more shared among all the players and the coaching staff whereas in baseball, hoops and soccer the players are on both O and D where it happens that just one player can be the difference maker. Just because the NFL calls them "world champions" still means that when you or anyone else uses it, it is an inaccurate, ignorant and arrogant term. I could of course brag that the Packers are 13 times "World Champions" but that is not right. 13 times American Champions is what they are. Come back and brag like that when the Cheaters beat a Canadian team and all other eggball teams around the world and then it fits.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 29, 2019 20:44:07 GMT
And the point I'm making is that in football the credit is more shared among all the players and the coaching staff Actually, that is exactly wrong. It is well known that quarterback is the most important position in all sports. It is the one position that really makes a difference. Correct. It is not right. The Green Bay Packers have only won the Super Bowl twice. Only Super Bowl champs can be called World Champions. Winning a Super Bowl once in the last twenty years is not much to brag about.
|
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Nov 29, 2019 21:45:41 GMT
And the point I'm making is that in football the credit is more shared among all the players and the coaching staff Actually, that is exactly wrong. It is well known that quarterback is the most important position in all sports. It is the one position that really makes a difference. Correct. It is not right. The Green Bay Packers have only won the Super Bowl twice. Only Super Bowl champs can be called World Champions. Winning a Super Bowl once in the last twenty years is not much to brag about. The QB has nothing to do with the defense. If you wanna insist to go with what you claim, then Peyton Manning is a bigger difference maker than Tom CryBaby since Manning took two different teams and won two SBs with them. And he did not have a cheating coach, that we know of, to help him out. Like I wrote before, Boston fans are obnoxious. Way to keep up the arrogant, narrow minded, pea brained attitude. Oh, and since the Patsies are American champions having only "won" 6 SBs, they are not as half as good as the Packers. And keep in mind that we beat your sorry asses when we met in the SB. If you wanna disagree with the Packers claim of being 13 time World Champions then take it up with them. There is a reason beyond Super Bowl wins why Green Bay is called Title Town. What do they call Boston? Bean town. Yeah, way to be proud of farting. Pathetic that you somehow think a 16-0 season is bragging rights when they lost to the Giants. The Dolphins were able to pop open the cham-pain at the end of that game and rightfully so.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 29, 2019 23:05:35 GMT
The QB has nothing to do with the defense. Congratulations, ace. Did you figure that out all by yourself? QBs, with few exceptions, have everything to do with winning. LOL! Peyton Manning is one of those few exceptions where the QB had very little to do with their team winning a SB. He was statistically one of the worst QBs to ever play in a Super Bowl. His offense was so pathetic that they awarded the MVP to a defensive player. Cry me a river, snowflake. We don't suffer fools. Like you.
|
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Nov 29, 2019 23:49:18 GMT
The QB has nothing to do with the defense. Congratulations, ace. Did you figure that out all by yourself? QBs, with few exceptions, have everything to do with winning. LOL! Peyton Manning is one of those few exceptions where the QB had very little to do with their team winning a SB. He was statistically one of the worst QBs to ever play in a Super Bowl. His offense was so pathetic that they awarded the MVP to a defensive player. Cry me a river, snowflake. We don't suffer fools. Like you. There is no point in continuing this argument when I have other things to do and nothing will get resolved. Peace and blessings to you this holiday season King Kong.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 30, 2019 1:30:29 GMT
Congratulations, ace. Did you figure that out all by yourself? QBs, with few exceptions, have everything to do with winning. LOL! Peyton Manning is one of those few exceptions where the QB had very little to do with their team winning a SB. He was statistically one of the worst QBs to ever play in a Super Bowl. His offense was so pathetic that they awarded the MVP to a defensive player. Cry me a river, snowflake. We don't suffer fools. Like you. There is no point in continuing this argument when I have other things to do ... Posts: 36,236
|
|
