1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
    Dismiss Notice
Why Not Register?

It only takes a few minutes to register on SixCrazyMinutes

Click Here

Who's better

Discussion in 'Other Sports Forum' started by LeTallecWiz, Aug 29, 2008.

  1. Oncy

    Oncy Guest

    [quote author=Delinquent link=topic=26559.msg660840#msg660840 date=1220001866]
    [quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660827#msg660827 date=1220000979]
    Senna v Schumacher.

    [/quote]

    Oooooooooh. Toughie. Schumacher. No Senna. Probably.

    It's always hard when one is a hateful cunt and also taking into account the dominance of Ferrari over Schumacher's reign. I'm inclined to go with Senna as I think he had to defeat a higher calibre of driver for large parts of his career. I don't think there is a comparable rivalry in Schumacher's career to that of Senna and Prost.

    In terms of success though, it's Schumacher without question. It would've been amazing to see them line up as team mates in the same era.
    [/quote]

    I have to say Del that in all the time i've known you this is the wrongest ive known you to be. I have been an F1 fan my whole life and was lucky enough to see both drivers in their pomps.
    I followed the F1 round Europe when i was younger and richer than i am now, and i collected (untill the last few years) all the best races on video/dvd and .............wait i have just realised how writing this kind of thing looks like im saying i know more than you. Im not saying that, as of course it is subjective. But please allow me to explain why 'subjectively' you should think schumacher is the greatest.

    Senna won his first world championship in THE car of its time, it was head and shoulders above any other car in the field, and was again the following year when Senna shared 10 race wins with his team mate and eventual world champion Alain Prost. The following season (1990) the Williams was probably the best car, but was driven by two average drivers (boutsen and patrese) and the two best drivers aside from Senna were at a very hit and miss Ferrari (Prost and Mansell), Senna's team mate was the always average Gerhard berger. All this basically meant that Williams who should have been winning races didnt have the drivers, and Ferrari who won a few didnt have the reliability (11 retirements for the season).
    It was pretty much the same story the following year, with the notable difference being that Mansell went to Williams, but a shocking start to the season (4 different drivers finished in second) meant that after 5 races the title was all but in the bag for Senna.
    The following year, the Williams was TOTALLY untouchable winning 10 races comfortably, and as Patrese was so weak Mansell walked the title with Ayrton stuck in a very poor Mclaren that retired as often as it finished. In this season Schumacher made his breakthrough in the Benetton and actually finished ahead of Senna in the title race (with SEVEN podiums in his first season in a mediocre car)
    1993 was (for me) Sennas best ever year. The car he drove was a total fucking dog. His team mates had NINE retirements and only finished in the points 3 times, and yet somehow he got five wins and 7 podiums out of it and dragged 73 points out of a car that deserved fuck all really his team mates (andretti and later hakkinen) took 11 points all year. Meanwhile Schumachers Bennetton only finished 9 races all year and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM was on the podium. Prost again won the title in a ridiculously good Williams.

    1994 the best car was the Williams, although the Benetton was much much stronger. It was going to be close and it looked like there would be a real battle between the best and crowd hero and this young upstart in similar cars (the benetton and williams having 8 fastest laps each in the season, although the Benetton retired a lot more)
    Race 1 - Senna has pole, streaks away to a large lead, Schumacher reels him in and takes him the pits, Senna spins out trying to catch Schumacher. WINNER - SCHUMACHER
    Race 2 - Senna has pole, Schumacher passes him at the start, Senna crashes out - WINNER - SCHUMACHER
    Race 3 - Senna has pole, suspension failure causes him to lose control and he fatally crashes. WINNER - Irrelevant.
    The astonishing thing about Schumachers win in this season is that he was disqualified for 2 races and also not allowed to race in a further 2 races, and his car retired from 2 races. So his car was only competing in 10 of 16 races against a superb car in the Williams, that only failed to finish 3 times all year. Schumachers record in the races he was allowed to compete in (or his car finished) was 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd. WOW eh? this wasnt the best car although it proved over the year to be a match for the Williams, he just drove the wheels off it. I know a lot is spoken about how he is the senior partner in any team he was in, but not then he wasnt, he had talent anyone could see it, but he was just a kid and wasnt afforded any specific help (presumably untill he won the first 4 races) and yet he amassed 92 0f his teams 103 constructors points and even though Williams won the constructors (it was much more reliable than the benetton) he managed to win the title by a single point. I know everyone points to the incident with Hill in Australia and rightly so, but look at it from his point of view he led the championship 66 points to 19 against Hill, had been the driver of the year by miles (Beating Senna twice on the track) and then was punished for missing a black flag with a disqualification. Then another disqualification for a worn barge board, and even worse than that given an unheard of two race ban for the offence. In the four races he was banned Damon Hill took a maximum FORTY points. Schumacher was in his eyes being robbed of the title he had earned beating Hill, Senna, Mansell, Hakkinen, Alesi etc it was hardly suprising that he was ready to do what it took to win in Australia. I dont blame him a bit and prefer to think of the fact he won a title he should never ever have won by rights.
    1995 - The williams was still the car to beat (taking pole after pole all year) but with average drivers Hill and Coulthard they basically blew their chances of a title with Schumacher taking advantage with 11 podiums from 13 finishes and 9 wins. His car wasnt the fastest but it was more reliable than the williams and from mid season, it was never really in doubt.

    1996 - Schumacher made the bravest move of his career joining an ailing Ferrari who had won just a handfull of races over the past 10 years. It wasnt a massive risk given the budget the team had coupled with his technical ability they were always going to succeed eventually. But the fist season was a pig and Hill in a different class car and no real competition romped to a title, and Murray cried and i said yeah yeah.

    1997 - None of Schumachers points for the season stood after a disgraceful attempt to steal the title from a deserving Jaques Villeneuve. Villeneuve suffered the same kind of problems Schumacher himself had in his first title winning season with five failures and one disqualification. Schumacher knew that his car wasnt good enough over the season, but still managed to beat the other Williams over the course of the season. I know we were all outraged at the time at what he tried to do in Jerez, but Villeneuve himself said that he would have done the same thing, and eveyone should be given a second chance? Ultimately he was ONE victory from winning a third title in a massively inferior car.

    1998 - Hakkinen was the better driver (and one of the most underrated of all time) and the Mclaren was the better car by some distance, yet once again Schumacher managed to take the title down to the wire in Japan but a combination of rotten luck (a stall on the grid) and even more rotten luck (a blow out after driving his way back through the entire field into contention for the title).

    1999 - Not really worth mentioning due to an injury for the first time in years Senna or Schumacher werent in the race.

    2000 - 2004 Michael Schumacher won every title and dozens of races (including 9 out of the first 10 in 2004) the only thing worth noting over these years of total dominance is that the FIA and Bernie spent every winter trying to stop him winning and he just went from strength to strength winning mercilessly. He created an unbeatable team around him from scratch and he singlehandedly ressurected the fortunes of an ailing team.
    NO other driver has ever done this. Every successful driver from Fangio to Senna moved TO the best team not from it, year in year out champions left the team they were with when they felt they were on a downturn and hotfooted it to the next big thing. Schumacher left the two time world championship team and did he go to the brilliant Mclaren or the invincible Williams? No he went to the shitfest Ferrari and he built something extraordinary. He built a team that could not even be stopped by the might of the FIA, he crushed every other driver with merciless control and with mindboggling consistency.

    Here are just a few of his records
    RECORD - 7 World championships
    RECORD - 91 race victories
    RECORD - 154 podiums
    RECORD - 1369 points
    RECORD - 68 pole positions
    RECORD - 76 fastest laps
    RECORD - 7 successive wins
    RECORD - 4700 Laps leading


    Just to take a couple of those in isolation SEVEN world championships, a huge record that will never ever be broken, but what blows my mind is that on THREE other occasions he finished one race win away from the title. He took it to the wire THREE more times, and could easily be looking at 10 Championships for him if luck had gone his way. He was in fact a lucky driver in general, but then when your that good you make your own luck.

    Okay and this one is the one for me that makes him just without a doubt the greatest of all time.
    He started 248 grand prix and finished on the podium 154 times, he even went the whole season in 2002 finishing EVERY SINGLE RACE on the podium Can you believe that? I mean every fucking race? No one has ever got close to his consistency ever.

    So who's faster? Probably Senna, who's better Undoubtably Schumacher.
    If you put them both in a car and said do one lap, i think 9 times out of ten Senna would come out on top. If you asked them to do 10 laps Schumacher would win all day every single day, there isnt a doubt in my mind.
    He was a phenomenon, and i was lucky enough to see him race live maybe 10 times and i tell you what he was fucking awesome.
     
  2. Avmenon

    Avmenon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    21,024
    Likes Received:
    285
    Trophy Points:
    615
    Location:
    Malaysia
    Andy's post is correcter.
     
  3. Paddy

    Paddy Very Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    15,353
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    350
    Location:
    High Wycombe
    Riera vs Kewell
     
  4. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    [quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg661215#msg661215 date=1220020515]
    [quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660881#msg660881 date=1220004258]
    Brady vs Montana
    [/quote]

    I'm waiting for Whaaaaddpie on this one ...!
    [/quote]

    If one of the options is Joe Cool, I'll take him over ANY quarterback, EVER.

    Tom's fantastic, true. But Montana's the best ever (IMHO).
     
  5. LeTallecWiz

    LeTallecWiz Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    62,037
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Trophy Points:
    2,200
    [quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=26559.msg661413#msg661413 date=1220037314]
    Barry Sanders v Emmitt Smith v Walter Payton
    [/quote]

    It's a really tough call - most will say Emmit doesn't deserve to be there because of his OL but I think his stats are the best in rushing yards & TDs (Though LT may surprass TDs) ... Barry Sanders was a phenomenal back BUT was one of those players who'd get 1,1,-2,-3,1,1,69,1,-1,3,-5,-2,etc catch the drift. Never seen Payton so it's hard to really judge.

    I'm a Cowboys fan though, and here it definitely blinds me, I'd take Emmit.
     
  6. SaintGeorge67

    SaintGeorge67 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    23,840
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    585
    Gender:
    Male
    You must have misunderstood the question LTW... the answer is clearly the mighty Barry.
     
  7. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    Barry, running behind Emmitt's OL would have had lots more yards and touchdowns than Emmitt. He was better.
     
  8. LeTallecWiz

    LeTallecWiz Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    62,037
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Trophy Points:
    2,200
    [quote author=Whaddapie link=topic=26559.msg662178#msg662178 date=1220128581]
    Barry, running behind Emmitt's OL would have had lots more yards and touchdowns than Emmitt. He was better.
    [/quote]

    not necessarily - he wasn't a RB meant for that OL, even at Oklahoma State (I think he was at the same time with Thurman Thomas) his running style was a lot of short or negative runs with 2-3 big ones. I'd take Emmit, he was at his best when it meant most (Who can forget the 16-13 separated shoulder game against the NYG? Or his playoff stats?).

    (Give Brady Rice & Taylor & Rathman, and you'd probably take him over Montana too, no?)
     
  9. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    Ok - This deserves it's own thread... Stand by.
     
  10. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    [quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg662213#msg662213 date=1220133497]

    (Give Brady Rice & Taylor & Rathman, and you'd probably take him over Montana too, no?)

    [/quote]

    No.

    Brady panics every now and then.

    He didn't have to go deep on EVERY pass last February with 40 seconds left - He had plenty of time to chip away 15 yards at a time. He paniced a little bit...

    Joe NEVER paniced.

    Give Joe and Tom the same supporting cast, and Joe wins more games. But he'd win more than ANYBODY in the same scenario...

    He's the greatest ever.
     
  11. LeTallecWiz

    LeTallecWiz Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    62,037
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Trophy Points:
    2,200
    I don't know if Joe is the greatest QB of all time - perhaps the greatest 'winner' - but then I guess, I guess that's what's most important. Terry Bradshaw has to be up there too - he is a vastly underrated QB. Also Johnny Unitas ...

    As for me, I think Aikman, though not as gifted as most of the 'greats' we list, was one of the most accurate, dependable 'big game' QBs ever. I know I know, "take your lenses off" but his stats in Super Bowls speak for themselves ... I wonder this - had he been asked to throw more, would we have seen the kind of seasons ROmo has put together?
     
  12. MaBigTip

    MaBigTip Very Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,573
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    350
    [quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg662052#msg662052 date=1220117214]
    [quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=26559.msg661413#msg661413 date=1220037314]
    Barry Sanders v Emmitt Smith v Walter Payton
    [/quote]

    It's a really tough call - most will say Emmit doesn't deserve to be there because of his OL but I think his stats are the best in rushing yards & TDs (Though LT may surprass TDs) ... Barry Sanders was a phenomenal back BUT was one of those players who'd get 1,1,-2,-3,1,1,69,1,-1,3,-5,-2,etc catch the drift. Never seen Payton so it's hard to really judge.

    I'm a Cowboys fan though, and here it definitely blinds me, I'd take Emmit.
    [/quote]

    From everything I've seen and heard, I would take both Barry and Payton over Emmitt, nothing against him but talent wise i think they both could get away from players better than Emmitt, better career goes to Emmitt over any running back.
     
  13. LeTallecWiz

    LeTallecWiz Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    62,037
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Trophy Points:
    2,200
     
  14. SaintGeorge67

    SaintGeorge67 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    23,840
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    585
    Gender:
    Male
    You forget that the Lions have been shit forvever though. They have won one playoff game in 50 years, which was thanks to Barry.
     
  15. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    Exactly.

    On THAT shite, Barry shone as one of the game's greatest ever talents...

    What would he have done from behind one of the games best ever OL's?
     
  16. LeTallecWiz

    LeTallecWiz Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    62,037
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Trophy Points:
    2,200
    [quote author=Whaddapie link=topic=26559.msg662672#msg662672 date=1220193499]
    What would he have done from behind one of the games best ever OL's?
    [/quote]

    What would have happened if my aunt was my uncle too?

    Blame Emmit for having that team around him ... He's the best statistically ever, no one can deny that.

    Imagine if Montana didn't have Rice! Sheesh, he'd have gone down as an average QB ... Yah, no one blames JOe for playing with the greatest WR (or Football player, fulls top) the game has ever seen.
     
  17. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    [quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg662344#msg662344 date=1220158180]
    I don't know if Joe is the greatest QB of all time - perhaps the greatest 'winner' - but then I guess, I guess that's what's most important. Terry Bradshaw has to be up there too - he is a vastly underrated QB. Also Johnny Unitas ...

    As for me, I think Aikman, though not as gifted as most of the 'greats' we list, was one of the most accurate, dependable 'big game' QBs ever. I know I know, "take your lenses off" but his stats in Super Bowls speak for themselves ... I wonder this - had he been asked to throw more, would we have seen the kind of seasons ROmo has put together?
    [/quote]

    Avy in "throws a Cowboy into a 'greatest ever' discussion" shocker!

    Quick... Greatest blowjob ever? "Eh, one I got from a girl in Dallas, while watching a Cowboys game..."

    Greatest hotdog ever? "Cowboy Stadium".

    ;D
     
  18. LeTallecWiz

    LeTallecWiz Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    62,037
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Trophy Points:
    2,200
    if you had to win the game, and you were on the 1 yard line, who would you take?

    no ifs buts or ands. Emmit or Barry.

    When you answer that question honestly, you'll see what RB did it when it counted most ...
     
  19. Whaddapie

    Whaddapie Well-Known Honorary Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    495
    Location:
    A Dub in Dallas
    Behind the same OL, Barry.

    As they spent their careers, Emmitt.
     
  20. SaintGeorge67

    SaintGeorge67 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    23,840
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    585
    Gender:
    Male
    [quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg662692#msg662692 date=1220194250]
    if you had to win the game, and you were on the 1 yard line, who would you take?

    no ifs buts or ands. Emmit or Barry.

    When you answer that question honestly, you'll see what RB did it when it counted most ...
    [/quote]

    I do recall however Emmitt blowing a 4th and 1 twice in a row against the Eagles.
     

Share This Page