Sports

Open Court: Greatness is relative

By Nick Prevenas
Published: Saturday, July 7, 2007 9:53 PM MST
“There are players who play great, and players who are great. There’s a big difference.”

This statement set the tone for a spirited debate between myself and Green Valley resident Bill Lamar.

On Friday at La Placita Mexican restaurant in the Green Valley Mall, Lamar and I discussed everything from the 1986 World Series to the destructive influence of over-expansion in professional sports.

But it was the debate regarding the proper classification of greatness that instigated the most passionate dialogue.

“Opinions on this matter either have to be formed with what you saw first-hand, or what you’ve been able to learn about after the fact,” he said. “Everything else is just idle speculation.”

Lamar then told a story his father told him about Jim Thorpe—the man regarded by many as the greatest athlete who ever lived.

“Not only was he bigger than everybody, he was faster and stronger than everyone, too.”

Thorpe then gave way to Jim Brown, the bruising Cleveland Browns’ running back who seemingly couldn’t be tackled.

Brown gave way to O.J. Simpson, who was actually an amazing runner before the events of 1994 turned him into a social pariah.

Gale Sayers gave way to Barry Sanders. Walter Payton gave way to Emmitt Smith. This is just how sports works.

“You can only measure an athlete’s greatness relative to how he dominated his era,” I countered. “A player like Bob Cousy might’ve struggled against today’s bigger, stronger, faster point guards, but that doesn’t diminish how he revolutionized the position in the 1950s.”

But what we both found endlessly irritating is how the current generation feels the need to degrade the superstars of yesteryear in order to make today’s superstars somehow seem more transcendent.

The prime example would be how certain media types uttered phrases like, “Michael Jordan never did anything like that,” after LeBron James’ unbelievable Game 5 performance against the Detroit Pistons during this spring’s Eastern Conference Finals.

“You have to give these athletes time to sustain a high level over time before you can start throwing around words like ‘greatness,’” Lamar said.

Greatness is also inevitably tied to circumstance.

Countless phenomenal athletes have fallen through the cracks of public consciousness for reasons that have nothing to do with their talent and ability.

Bernard King was every bit as unstoppable as Jordan in his prime, but a series of knee injuries and a brief bout with drug addiction derailed his promising career.

“Quarterbacks like Archie Manning and Fran Tarkenton could’ve been talked about like Montana and Unitas, but they were stuck on such lousy teams,” Lamar added.

Ask anyone who hung around Rucker Park in New York during the 1970s, and they’ll talk about Earl “The Goat” Manigault in the same reverent tones typically reserved for players like Oscar Robertson or Wilt Chamberlain.

So what did we ultimately decide was the difference between players who play great and players who are great?

“Great players move you,” I said. “Great players make the extraordinary seem possible.”

nprevenas@gvnews.com | 547-9747



Copyright © 2009 - Green Valley News and Sun
[«] Return to Home     |     [x] Close Window