Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I won't defend Bonds - guy is an ### and I don't like him. But I'll defend the pick. Steroids helped but it helped his contemporaries as well and the dude had hit somewhere around or over 500 HR before any controversy surrounded him (from my recollection). I think most historians say he's top-10 with the controversy. Top-3 without. I think ~20 MLB players had been picked before him. I have no doubt he's one of the top-20 players all-time.
I should clarify - I'm not criticizing your pick. This was getting to the point where I was considering him, too. Just so difficult to determine where/how to rank giving the steroids issue.
I remember people being befuddled when learning that not popular, not super fit no-name relief pitchers were some of the biggest users.
All of sports. The sports world we know today would not exist if not for Floods stance - and sacrifice.
I’d suggest that a moment which has ramifications beyond that one sport, and furthermore those whose impact reaches well beyond sports, hold that much more weight come judging.
Yeah... I'm torn here because, from a legal perspective, this case is absolutely monumental and changed forever how collective bargaining works.
Nice selection!! Was on my "under the radar" list and was hoping it would stay that way for awhile.
Incorrect. The merger happened prior to any AFL-NFL Championship Games (now known as the Super Bowl). The merger was announced in 1966 and became completed before the 1970 season (see below).
Well, the merger was announced, but it didn't actually happen.
Hahaha. And I am trying to take the shine off.....hahaa. it happened because they started playing the championship game between the leagues that eventually became the Super Bowl. The SB III moment is what legitimized the AFL so it does have it's own merit.....haha
thought you were gonna go old Euro for your tennis pick and was prepared to refute you. i dont think the Big 3 21st C male tennis players are appreciated for how unprecedented they are. there are no significant training differences between the 70s & 80s and now and i'm not questioning the hearts of those ol champions, but today's guys would smokeshow em all
if we redo this draft in 5 or 10 years, Nadal may also qualify as "Greatest Horse" ... who knows?
Back in the day I really dug me some men's tennis. And there were some old euro types on them courts. I do agree that you could send Rog or Nadal back in a time machine and they would crush it. Even with wooden rackets!
Definitely.
This is a good take, and pretty much aligned with where my thoughts on on the matter.AAABatteries said:
Really good pick. He is essentially almost, if not, on par with Federer who went a while ago. Pretty amazing what we have today in terms of some of the absolute if not greatest ever tennis players playing at the same time, against one another.
