Good morning everyone. I know this news is a couple days old, but I really wanted to touch up on how shocked I am at the punishment of Tom Brady. I believe in my last nuggets I defiantly stated (while pounding my fist on the table as I typed it) something along the lines of "there is no way Tom Brady gets suspended." Well don't I look foolish? I suspected the Patriots would be hit with a loss of draft picks, though I will say the first rounder is surprising. But I was not expecting Tom Brady to be suspended and frankly, would not be surprised if he beats the NFL in court and plays from the start.
"But what does this have to do with the 49ers? I wish this guy would just stick to the team he writes about." Says the Jim Gaffigan style heckler in my mind.
Well, Dwight Clark posted this on his twitter account a couple day ago. This got me going on one of the long standing arguments I have had with varying people over the years. What do people mean when they say one player is better than another? Sure, if I were to say Dez Bryant is a better player than AJ Jenkins, I would get no argument from anyone. But it gets a little murkier when comparing hall of fame players from different eras. Nothing Dwight Clark said was incorrect, but everything he listed are accomplishments. When I think of what "better" means, it does not mean which player had the greater accumulation of success, but who had the greater accumulation of attributes that go towards playing their respective position. This is especially true when comparing two historically great players. For me, the greatest QB ever (Sorry Joe and Steve) is John Elway. I don't think anyone would argue that John was the most accomplished QB, that title absolutely goes to Joe Montana. But John had the greatest accumulation of attributes that went towards playing the QB position. In debates like these, accomplishments should play a large role, but team success is incredibly overstated in my humble opinion. To the links!