Blog Entry

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

Posted on: September 16, 2009 12:53 am
Edited on: September 18, 2009 1:35 am
 
This post will lightly discuss the 5 luckiest athletes of all time. To emphasize, I do not mean to say that the people listed are not (or were) tough opponents, nor do I suggest that they don't (or didn't) have some talent.... Although I must admit that some of these guys have very little to no talent. The point is that often you have a case of incredible circumstances meeting a good to moderate talent to create a superstar who really isn't as good as everyone thinks. My list of these people is as follows:

1. Joe Namath: By far the luckiest athlete of all time. Interesting Stats: barely had a career 50% complete percentage (50.1%), threw for below 50% completion percentage 7 out of his 12 years, had a career average of 5.6 yards-per-attempt, had a career 65 quarterback rating, etc. I understand that Joe Namath predicted a Super Bowl win by sipping Pina Coladas at the pool and he allegedly "helped" win the big game that legitimized Football's Rival Divisions. However, the man had little talent and was blessed with a superb group of teammates around him. If it wasn't for ideal circumstances no one would ever know who this guy was.

2. Shaquille O'Neal: This is another guy who will go down as one of the greatest Centers of all time. But let's be honest, the guy has routinely been lazy, unwilling to dedicate himself to his craft, and has embarrassed himself with a skill set so far below the average NBA norm that he should be ashamed. Shaquille cannot dribble, he cannot shoot, and he's routinely overweight and unable to run the floor without being gassed. This is a joke. If this guy was just a mere 4 inches shorter I doubt anyone would have ever even heard of this guy.

3. Marvin Harrison: The guy had decent speed, good hands, decent routes, but most importantly he had Peyton Manning throwing to him. Most people will call BS on this one but if you've watched the Colts over the years you'll realize that Manning throws for his 4,000 yards and 25+ TDs no MATTER WHAT. The Colts didn't miss a beat when Harrison went down 2 years ago. They didn't miss a beat when Harrison could barely run his routes (he looked like an old man). He isn't missing a beat this year. Point is, Marvin Harrison was a pretty good receiver who fell into an ideal situation with one of the best quarterbacks of all time who consistently put the ball on the numbers and called audibles at the line. Marvin Harrison truely was a product of his environment.

4. Cal Ripken Jr: Cal Ripken is one of the most famous baseball players in the modern era yet his stats and/or contribution don't really explain why (e.g. 11 seasons with a batting average of .264 or below, 9 seasons with a season HR total in the mid to low teens, etc). Cal had a decent early career but struggled middle to late career with terrible numbers both in the box and in the field (yet he continued to be selected to ALL-STAR games). If it wasn't for his consequtive games streak and the fortunate situation he was in while he played for Baltimore, this is a guy you would probably have heard about...but not really think twice about (no less a hall of famer).

5. LaDainian Tomlinson: LaDainian Tomlinson makes this list, not because he isn't talented, but because he has received far too much credit for the amount of TDs he has received (which seems to be primary basis for people making an argument for how talented he is). To further illustrate this point, LT received more carries than any other back in league history inside the 5 in the amount of seasons LT has played. So logically it follows that he has the most TDs for a RB in the amount of seasons he has played. Further, his yards-per-carry has been below the league average of 4.0 ypc for almost 50% of the seasons he has played (a number that shows how low his productivity actually is). Ultimately, LT is a talented RB who ran behind one of the best offenses for quite some time, who had a good offensive line, a routine pro-bowl FB, and coaches who utilized him far more than any RB could ever dream to be used. I believe LT is more of a product of environment than sheer talent. That is why he makes this list. 
Category: NFL
Comments

Since: Nov 17, 2006
Posted on: September 27, 2009 10:22 pm
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

Mathimus21, thanks for the support! It's good to see somebody has some common sense; very few people on this website do. Keep up the good posts!



Since: Jul 28, 2009
Posted on: September 26, 2009 10:23 pm
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

"The point is that often you have a case of incredible circumstances meeting a good to moderate talent to create a superstar who really isn't as good as everyone thinks."

This is the definition of luck that LTisntthatgood uses to support his claims.  Somehow it has managed to elude most of the people on this site, yet it is the most important part of LTisntthatgood's claims.  If half of you know as much about proper English as you claim, you'd see how his opening statement is textbook "arguementative" writing.  He makes it clear what the topic or "thesis" is.  He follows it with a definition of what luck is.  He then lists his view in relation to the subject (in this case he lists 5 athletes he feels are the luckiest) and supports his reason for listing them by using information that falls under his definition of luck. 




Since: Jul 28, 2009
Posted on: September 26, 2009 9:44 pm
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

It's amazing how the ingorance of the majority of posts on this thread has turned a simple conversation into a spelling bee.  Husker tex has way too much time on his/her hands.  To go through and individually pick out post after post and highlight them is weird and obsessive to say the least.  Since everyone on here is an English major, I wanted to mention that, "You win." is a sentence fragment. "Then, he calls you a liar" is wrongful use of a comma.  A comma seperates lists or combines two sentences.  I also find it humorous that anyone would get bent that someone can't spell LT's name right.  Does LT know you have a crush on him tex?  I use LT because I have no idea how to spell his name.  Why do you think LT stuck as a nickname even though the nickname LT was already taken by Lawrence Taylor?  I'm sure that early in Tomlinson's career, people started using LT because Ladainian (is that right?) is not a common name.  I enjoy hockey a great deal, but I would be hard pressed to spell a lot of hockey players names right.  It doesn't mean I can't have an educated discussion about hockey. One last thing I'd like to add is that nobody on here has disproved anything.  Not until you actually understand what the original discussion was about, which is "the top 5 luckiest athletes of all time". You couldn't be more incorrect to believe that you've disproved a person based on spelling, grammar, and a handful of opinions from ignorant idiots who couldn't prove that the sun was shining on a bright, clear day.  If you want to disprove the argument of the original post, you first need to define luck.  But since you're all English majors, I'm sure you know that and you're just concerning yourself with more important concerns like grammar rather than defining luck and then supporting or rebutting based on your definition.  It's kind of funny too that you anyone would get upset enough to say, well I'm just not going to post here anymore.  Are you the same kid who always got mad and said, "I'm taking my ball and going home"?!   




Since: Nov 17, 2006
Posted on: September 18, 2009 5:35 pm
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

It's funny where you choose to be grammatically concerned. I should be concerned about a guy telling me that "your stupid" instead of "you're stupid" but people shouldn't take my article seriously if I forget an "i" in LT's name. Apparently an incorrectly spelled argument is no argument at all.....  Further, by you posting a bunch of people's irrelevant comments doesn't prove anything. My stats have YET to be disproven, by you or by ANYONE of the people on here. Most of the people on here just called me names and told me to be ashamed of myself but none refuted my points. The only person that even came close was the guy referring to shaq and his point was off point as well. The reason I credited shaq for being so successful was because of athleticism and because of height. Hence, a guy 4 inches shorter who was just as athletic still wouldn't be a well known player with Shaq's skill set. That comment still stands. Yao Ming is an example of a guy who is tall and doesn't have much athleticism...so the argument is really not on point. Also, Michael Jordan far exceeded his height in terms of what he did on the floor (everybody knows that); Jordan would have still been a star, even at 6'2 as an elite point guard (just look at Iverson). The argument from LT makes a blanket statement about LT's skill based purely on opinion but does nothing in terms of my point. You can re-post as many of these comments from these people as you want but until one of them includes a reason that even attempts to rebut my points your post still doesn't have any credit/reliability.




Since: Oct 11, 2006
Posted on: September 18, 2009 4:22 am
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

your posts are irrelevantYou know, in a way you're right.  The fact that you can't spell shouldn't detract from the points you made.  If I had known you were going to be so thin-skinned about it, I would have either PM'ed you or said nothing at all.

You see, in a way, I did you a favor.  Like I said, I probably should have given you a private heads-up about the mistakes, so as not to embarrass you and so your blog would have seemed more authoritative.  However, I bet that you'll never make the mistake of spelling athletes' names wrong again.

Just to put it in the simplest of terms, it would be like me writing a slam piece about the Miami Dolphins and every time I referred to them, I spelled their name "Maimi Dolfins".  You'd think I didn't know what I was talking about.

Also, I didn't make this personal; I just said that you spelled a couple of names wrong.  You've decided to make it about me.  So here we go.  I didn't want to do this; I'd rather we just drop the whole thing.  But since you've decided to ignore everyone else and go after me, let me remind you what others said about YOU.


xpmar9x said you were stupid. 

rasheedj81 said that you should be ashamed of yourself.  Then he made a pretty good case for Marvin Harrison.

blystr2002 said:

You can't just say if he (Shaq) was 4 inches shorter b/c what if Jordan was 4 inches shorter he wouldn't be dunking on anybody or shooting over anybody.  That is an invalid point.  Also, LT is one of the best backs to ever play the game.  he had a 6-8 yr run where he was the most complete back in the league from rushing and receiving to pass blocking.sirbed said:

I really don't understand what you're trying to say Then, he called you a liar.

RollingHills said:

You did spell Cal Ripken Jr.'s name wrong. Not 100% when you get one wrong. And I agree with that poster, he does not belong on the list. Also, it is true that Shaq cannot shoot free throws and that the biggest reason for his success is his size alone, gowever, he can pass and has strong moves that make him the dominant center he was.
Mr Jim (a fellow Dolphins fan) made perhaps the best argument for Ripken and said:

To put Ripken on your list and try to justify it shows
you to not only be an idiot - but a d-bag as well.  I wish you didn't have the logo you have because as a 
Phins fan, you're an embarrassment.
  
nellieh called your motives into question:

 You forgot Namath also played in New York. But is the fact namath beat Shula in SB III the reason you included him?So in summary, you were called stupid, that you should be ashamed of yourself, that your point was invalid, that you couldn't be understood, that you were wrong, that you were a liar, an idiot, a d-bag, an embarrassment and that you might have suspect motives BY OTHER PEOPLE.  In between all that, I'd say they effectively shot holes in most of your points.  I didn't have to.

I just said you spelled "Ripken" & "LaDainian" wrong and you attack me.  And to top it all off, I actually thought you made a good point about Namath.  Hilarious.

Again, if I were you, I'd be more concerned about what the others said.

Don't bother replying, I won't be visiting this blog again anytime soon.

You win.  Your logic is infallible; the points you made are unassailable.  You are a blogging god.  Undecided

P.S.  You spelled "consecutive" incorrectly.




Since: Oct 11, 2006
Posted on: September 18, 2009 4:20 am
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

your posts are irrelevantYou know, in a way you're right.  The fact that you can't spell shouldn't detract from the points you made.  If I had known you were going to be so thin-skinned about it, I would have either PM'ed you or said nothing at all.

You see, in a way, I did you a favor.  Like I said, I probably should have given you a private heads-up about the mistakes, so as not to embarrass you and so your blog would have seemed more authoritative.  However, I bet that you'll never make the mistake of spelling athletes' names wrong again.

Just to put it in the simplest of terms, it would be like me writing a slam piece about the Miami Dolphins and every time I referred to them, I spelled their name "Maimi Dolfins".  You'd think I didn't know what I was talking about.

Also, I didn't make this personal; I just said that you spelled a couple of names wrong.  You've decided to make it about me.  So here we go.  I didn't want to do this; I'd rather we just drop the whole thing.  But since you've decided to ignore everyone else and go after me, let me remind you what others said about YOU.


xpmar9x said you were stupid. 

rasheedj81 said that you should be ashamed of yourself.  Then he made a pretty good case for Marvin Harrison.

blystr2002 said:

You can't just say if he (Shaq) was 4 inches shorter b/c what if Jordan was 4 inches shorter he wouldn't be dunking on anybody or shooting over anybody.  That is an invalid point.  Also, LT is one of the best backs to ever play the game.  he had a 6-8 yr run where he was the most complete back in the league from rushing and receiving to pass blocking.sirbed said:

I really don't understand what you're trying to say Then, he called you a liar.

RollingHills said:

You did spell Cal Ripken Jr.'s name wrong. Not 100% when you get one wrong. And I agree with that poster, he does not belong on the list. Also, it is true that Shaq cannot shoot free throws and that the biggest reason for his success is his size alone, gowever, he can pass and has strong moves that make him the dominant center he was.
Mr Jim (a fellow Dolphins fan) made perhaps the best argument for Ripken and said:

To put Ripken on your list and try to justify it shows
you to not only be an idiot - but a d-bag as well.  I wish you didn't have the logo you have because as a 
Phins fan, you're an embarrassment.
  
nellieh called your motives into question:

 You forgot Namath also played in New York. But is the fact namath beat Shula in SB III the reason you included him?So in summary, you were called stupid, that you should be ashamed of yourself, that your point was invalid, that you couldn't be understood, that you were wrong, that you were a liar, an idiot, a d-bag, an embarrassment and that you might have suspect motives BY OTHER PEOPLE.  In between all that, I'd say they effectively shot holes in most of your points.  I didn't have to.

I just said you spelled "Ripken" & "LaDainian" wrong and you attack me.  And to top it all off, I actually thought you made a good point about Namath and I'd agree that Shaq has been historically lazy.  Hilarious.

If I were you, I'd be more concerned about what the others said.

Don't bother replying, I won't be visiting this blog again anytime soon.

You win.  Your logic is infallible; the points you made are unassailable.  You are a blogging god.  Undecided

P.S.  You spelled "consecutive" incorrectly.




Since: Sep 18, 2009
Posted on: September 18, 2009 3:13 am
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

cal ripken beat his wife and was an alcoholic



Since: Nov 17, 2006
Posted on: September 18, 2009 3:02 am
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

HuskerTex: my points have NOT been "effectively" refuted. Your only point was that I spelled a few words incorrectly. For your information, this is a casual post; not a law brief. Stop acting like your intelligent because you caught an incorrectly spelled word. The bottom line is that Namath had awful stats, Shaq has no talent and dominates because of raw athleticism and size, Ripken had 11 seasons with below a 264 batting average, LT was fed the ball inside the 5 more than any back in league history, and the Colts passing game is identical with or without Harrison in the lineup. You haven't refuted ANY of those points. Until you do your posts are irrelevant.



Since: Sep 18, 2009
Posted on: September 18, 2009 2:23 am
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

cal ripken did steroids and only had 1 dominant year



Since: Oct 11, 2006
Posted on: September 18, 2009 1:58 am
 

Top 5 Luckiest Athletes of ALL TIME

Besides that, what did you expect when you wrote this blog?  I thought this was the CONTROVERSIAL SPORTS BLOG where you would "talk about all the real stuff that people want to talk about but are too scared to discuss".  You should be prepared when people disagree with you.

Not only has every argument on your list been effectively refuted, but your motives have been called into question as well.

Just how objective can you when you call yourself LTisntThatGood and then write a blog ripping him?


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com