- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Has any one competitor changed anothers legacy more than Fed against Roddick?
Posted on 7/28/17 at 12:59 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Posted on 7/28/17 at 12:59 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
The Brooklyn Dodgers of the 40s & 50s and the Casey Stengel NY Yankees.
0
Posted on 7/28/17 at 1:30 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
Sham without Secretariat
first thing I thought of after reading the thread title.
Sham would still hold track records
Posted on 7/28/17 at 1:42 pm to WinnPtiger
Els without Tiger is a better nomination than Mickelson without Tiger.
Els is already in rare company with 4 majors (probably top 15-25 player of all time) but he'd have at least 2-4 more majors if Tiger never showed up. That puts him in Palmer/Watson tier of golf and all of a sudden we're talking about Els-Mickelson being one of the top rivalries in golf history
Els is already in rare company with 4 majors (probably top 15-25 player of all time) but he'd have at least 2-4 more majors if Tiger never showed up. That puts him in Palmer/Watson tier of golf and all of a sudden we're talking about Els-Mickelson being one of the top rivalries in golf history
This post was edited on 7/28/17 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 7/28/17 at 2:04 pm to lsupride87
Yeah so Georgia, not LSU
Posted on 7/28/17 at 2:45 pm to lsupride87
quote:
I disagree. I will never buy the competition argument in any sport. As if there is a weird phenomenon that makes a sports athletes suck in one time frame......
I don't trust people to diagnose it. But such factors clearly exist. TV deals or collective bargaining agreements can change the relative popularity of a sport for the next generation. Phenomenons like globalization(basketball) and popularity of the sport(boxing) drastically alter the talent pool of elite athletes who make it their number one goal.
All else held equal, there are now more potential boxing heavyweight champions lining up at defensive end and fewer Alex Rodriguez-level talents sitting in the Dominican Republic instead of the MLB. That certainly affects competition.
But yeh, not little tiny windows usually.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 2:50 pm to lsupride87
quote:
2012. We would have been in the SEC title game against UGA in a rematch. Winner goes on to crush Notre Dame
What? Alabama crushed #1 ranked Notre Dame. Just because Saban and Bama did didn't mean LSU would. LSU lost to #15 ranked CLemson.
Miles didn't even beat Notre Dame in a bowl when they weren't ranked. The notion that he would have crushed them when they were number 1 is silly.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 2:51 pm to TheSexecutioner
quote:2012 LSU or UGA crushes ND for the title. You disagree. Have a good weekend
Miles didn't even beat Notre Dame in a bowl when they weren't ranked. The notion that he would have crushed them when they were number 1 is silly.
This post was edited on 7/28/17 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 7/28/17 at 3:17 pm to lsupride87
Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic
2016 French - Federer doesn't play, Nadal withdraws, Murray beats Stan in the semis before losing to Djokovic in the final
2013 Australian - Nadal doesn't play, Murray beats Federer in semis before losing to Djokovic in the final
2015 Australian - Federer and Nadal both go out relatively early with neither in top form, Murray loses to Djokovic in the final
Those are three slams that Murray pretty much would have won if Djokovic wasn't alive. Even if the draw would have been changed around due to Djokovic not being in the field. Murray was clearly the second-best player in the field all three times.
Murray has lost to Djokovic in three other finals besides the ones I named, although i wouldn't say he was the clear cut next best guy in any of those fields.
Murray is considered, what, a top 15 player ever? Somewhere around there?
With 6 or 7 career grand slam titles, in an era somewhat overlapped by Federer and Nadal, Murray would be looked at a lot differently than he currently is with only 3. Plus, he'd have the career slam.
ETA: He'd also probably have held the #1 ranking for a long arse time, and won a lot more Masters 1000 events.
2016 French - Federer doesn't play, Nadal withdraws, Murray beats Stan in the semis before losing to Djokovic in the final
2013 Australian - Nadal doesn't play, Murray beats Federer in semis before losing to Djokovic in the final
2015 Australian - Federer and Nadal both go out relatively early with neither in top form, Murray loses to Djokovic in the final
Those are three slams that Murray pretty much would have won if Djokovic wasn't alive. Even if the draw would have been changed around due to Djokovic not being in the field. Murray was clearly the second-best player in the field all three times.
Murray has lost to Djokovic in three other finals besides the ones I named, although i wouldn't say he was the clear cut next best guy in any of those fields.
Murray is considered, what, a top 15 player ever? Somewhere around there?
With 6 or 7 career grand slam titles, in an era somewhat overlapped by Federer and Nadal, Murray would be looked at a lot differently than he currently is with only 3. Plus, he'd have the career slam.
ETA: He'd also probably have held the #1 ranking for a long arse time, and won a lot more Masters 1000 events.
This post was edited on 7/28/17 at 6:58 pm
Posted on 7/28/17 at 6:41 pm to lsupride87
quote:If someone were to ask me about Federer in 20 years I'd probably say "he was good but Nadal owned his arse". It's hard to be the GOAT when you weren't the best of your era.
This is the better argument. Fed would go from tennis GOAT, to all time GOAT over Gretzky
Posted on 7/28/17 at 6:44 pm to lsupride87
Imagen Pat Ewing without Jordan! What a pointless thread.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 6:47 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Alydar without Affirmed -Triple Crown winner
Since Affirmed isn't remembered much he wouldn't be either but a TC winner is a TC winner.
Since Affirmed isn't remembered much he wouldn't be either but a TC winner is a TC winner.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 6:55 pm to jeff5891
quote:
Imagine Nadal without Fed
Actually, it's the other way around. If Nadal wasn't in the picture, Federer would have been like the Golden State Warriors x 100. He would have likely won 20/24 slams from 2004-2009.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 6:56 pm to mattz1122
quote:I'm imagining him still not being the best player in the NBA.
Imagen Pat Ewing without Jordan! What a pointless thread.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 6:58 pm to beaverfever
Much like Roddick w/o Fed, eh?
Posted on 7/28/17 at 8:36 pm to beaverfever
quote:Barkley or Drexler, on the other hand...
quote:
Imagen Pat Ewing without Jordan! What a pointless thread.
I'm imagining him still not being the best player in the NBA.
Posted on 7/28/17 at 8:46 pm to lsupride87
Les without Jarret Lee.
If Lee doesn't throw a bunch of interceptions for TDs, Les doesn't hate the passing game.
If Lee doesn't throw a bunch of interceptions for TDs, Les doesn't hate the passing game.
Posted on 7/31/17 at 11:41 pm to lsupride87
Should Roddick have gotten in the HOF?
Posted on 7/31/17 at 11:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Fed could have realistically won like 4-5 French in a row and would be considered one of the GOAT clay court players
Yep... Federer without Nadal wins 10 majors in a row from Wimbledon 2005 to US Open 2007. Dude wins the calendar slam in consecutive years
Posted on 8/1/17 at 9:08 am to beaverfever
quote:And I would say you are a sports fan that hasnt the slightest clue about tennis
If someone were to ask me about Federer in 20 years I'd probably say "he was good but Nadal owned his arse".
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News