Overhyping of Championships

 

Patrick Ewing...Dan Marino...Alexander Ovechkin...Ted Williams... All 4 of these athletes are considered some of the best to ever play their respective sport but they all are missing one thing, a championship ring. The age old question of "Where does player 'A' rank all time?" is asked millions of times a day around the world and many people respond to that question with the amount of championships that player has. In my opinion that is the wrong way to answer. Yes, championships are important but in team sports there are very few players who have the chance to influence a team so much that it makes them a title contender (obviously in sports like tennis and golf, championships are more important). Let's remember, at the end of the season there is one "winning" team and the rest are considered "losers" because they did not win the championship. So winning a championship is extremely difficult and not winning during your career should not be the sole reason of your all time ranking.

If Mike Trout never wins the World Series in his career he will be described as "one of the best players, but he never won a ring" and I think that's a joke. Trout is a once in a lifetime player who has played on some below average to average teams and baseball is a team sport with 8 other guys influencing the outcome. I understand that championships are important but it's ridiculous to make that the only argument for a player. The prime example for this topic was LeBron James, who is a top 3 player of all time in the NBA. Whenever LeBron is compared to Michael Jordan no matter where you are or who you are with the statement of "well Jordan has 6 rings" or "well Jordan never lost in the finals" will be brought up, I guarantee it. Jordan is the best player of all time and sure he has a 6-0 record in the NBA finals but is that the only reason? Absolutely not. Bill Russell has 11 NBA rings (e-le-ven!!!!! let that sink in for a minute) so does that make him the greatest ever by default because he has the most rings? 11 rings is absolutely incredible, but Russell played in a completely different time and dominated his competition because he was so big. Jordan is the best ever because he changed the way the game was played, he would have dominated any era of basketball, and he put up incredible stats. LeBron is not far away from Jordan, in my opinion, and the championship argument has never made much sense to me.

In 2010 LeBron left his hometown Cavaliers to join Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh in Miami. In 2016 Kevin Durant left the Oklahoma City Thunder to join one of the best teams ever in Golden State. What drove these players to leave and face the backlash of "being a snake" or "selling out"? Ultimately, the chance to win a championship drove these guys to change teams because if they never won that would be an asterisk on their resume. That poses another topic: either we need to stop criticizing players for "ring chasing" or we need to stop saying "well he was a great player but he never won a ring." We as sports fans can't have it both ways. So please, stop burning jerseys and stop tweeting the snake emoji to players, it's ludicrous. Fans never fully appreciate what athletes do for a city. If they don't win a ring it's considered a losing season by most people. In the 2006-2007 season, LeBron led the Cavs to the NBA Finals where they ultimately lost to the Spurs, but let's look at the Cavs roster. They had Shannon Brown, Daniel Gibson, Drew Gooden, Larry Hughes, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, LeBron, Damon Jones, Dwayne Jones, Donyell Marshall, Ira Newble, Sasha Pavlovic, Scott Pollard, Eric Snow, Anderson Varejao, and David Wesley. (Editor side-note: she does not recognize ANY of these names, except LeBron James... these people may as well be mall walkers for all she knows) That might be the worst team of ALL TIME to play in the NBA Finals and LeBron carried them there. (editor side-note #2: her previous statement now makes sense... it's because they actually suck) But the only thing fans wanted to talk about was "well he didn't win a ring so it wasn't a great year." Get real people, no wonder there is no "loyalty" in sports because players aren't appreciated unless they win a championship.

I think that as a sports culture we overhype championships and we don't respect the athletes we have. I have never been over to Europe so this next statement is just an opinion of mine. When I look at European/International soccer it is a completely different mindset. If Cristiano Ronaldo never wins a World Cup he will still be viewed as one of the greatest soccer players ever. Here I think he would be recognized as great but not given the appreciation he deserves. That's not to say these guys don't have immense pressure on them but I think it's a different perspective. It brings me back to Mike Trout, the guy is absolutely incredible but does not receive nearly the amount of recognition that he should and it's because he has played on mediocre teams so far in his career. He could (should have in my opinion) have won the MVP every year he has been the league so far and that is astounding. For this reason, I hope he wins a World Series before he retires so he can start getting the appreciation he deserves.

I understand comparing players and arguing who we think is the best is great bar talk! Championships are important when discussing a players legacy but it's not the most important think, you have to look at the overarching career of a player first. How many championships did they play in? Where do they rank on some of the all time stat leader boards? Did they affect/change the way the game is played? How great of a team did they play on? Let's stop using the amount of championships a certain player has as the main argument and stop holding it against guys who don't have any.