Home of the A10 Bounce“Because there is always room for one more on the bench.”
and MAAC Press Break“No matter what sport you like these guys got it covered. ”
The Mount Rushmore of Sports
Couldn’t help but notice ESPN’s recently concluded series on this topic hosted by Rick Reilly. I was both intrigued by the overall series and then proud that my home state of Illinois was either selected or voted as having the “best Mt. Rushmore of Sports”. Michael Jordan, Walter Payton, Ernie Banks & Mike Ditka … that’s a pretty good list, but I’m not sure how Ditka made it … think I might’ve gone with George Halas, Red Grange or Bobby Hull before Ditka. Anyway, that’s the subject of a separate debate among us Illini .. or … Illinoisans … or… Noisans… or … Annoyans … what the heck are we???? That’s it … I’m a Chicagoan … case closed! Me and Scarface … we’re practically brudders.
ANYWAY, the real subject of this post is to ask YOU, the readers, to offer up your own personal Mount Rushmore of Sports. There aren’t really any rules … you can base yours on who you think ought to be on EVERYONE’s list … you can base yours purely on who is most meaningful to YOU. It can be international, national, regional … whatever. My only request is that you pick 5 people in sports, not 4, so this is actually a Mt Rushmore-more of Sports. So pick 5 that work for you and share ‘em with our readers.
Here’s mine, in no particular order:
- Babe Ruth – the most prolific hitter ever; you could say that “Baseball is The Sport that Ruth Built”. His stats relative to his peers are AMAZING.
- Walter Payton — to me, he epitomized the words ”football player” and “class”. I started watching the NFL because of Sweetness.
- Joe Montana — to me, the greatest QB I’ve ever seen. A true winner; one of the greatest pressure/big game players … both at Notre Dame and with the 49ers.
- Michael Jordan — I lived in Chicago during MJ’s entire career with the 6-time champion Bulls. He was one of a kind and raised the bar for future NBA stars.
- Wayne Gretzky — took pro hockey on his back and really made it popular in the States. A great player, a champion, an ambassador of the game.
Feel free to comment on mine, but by all means send us yours!
89 Responses to “The Mount Rushmore of Sports”
Trackbacks
Leave a Reply
Follow Pickin’ Splinters on:
Wow Wally! Before reading yours I developed a list very similar on my own.
Willie Mays – best that ever played the game;
Wayne Gretzky – best that ever played the game;
Joe Montana – there was a magic there that was surreal;
Michael Jordan – any questions?
Seabiscuit – I knew you’d love that one!
Right after I posted I looked at the side bar and saw none other than Muhammad Ali. If it HAS to be people, I’ll put Ali in place of Seabiscuit.
Well, Pete, we could get into a discussion about whether horse racing is a “sport”, but I fear it would morph into another long tangent about whether offense or defense wins chan’ships
Great list. I wish I had the chance to see Willie Mays play in his prime … he was way past it by the time I was old enough to notice. Not that I saw the Babe in a prior life or anything … I just thought his accomplishments relative to peers, plus capturing the nation’s imagination, were things that set him apart.
(You and I will be accused of being “ND homers”, but even if I weren’t an alum, Montana would still be on my mountain because he ended the Cowboys reign and helped create a new dynasty at a time when I when I was an absolute sports nut. Nobody was more clutch than Joe Cool.)
I liked this segment too. ESPN does something like this every so often, and usually I hate it. This was pretty cool though.
I think to be on the Rushmore of sports, you have to be transcendent in some way. Based off of that, here’s the five I’d pick:
Michael Jordan – He was a pretty good player. He redefined the shooting guard.
Ruth – Wally nailed it. Compared to others who played in his day, not even close.
Jim Brown – he was a modern day Jim Thorpe for us. Lacrosse is not in our sports lexicon, but he absolutely dominated the game. He flirted with 2,000 in a season long before anyone (I think).
Joe Louis – He still remains one of the most dominant boxers of all time. He showed longevity in a sport that still has none – only argument is Ali. He defended his title more than anyone (I think) and did it mostly with KOs. He carried the sport after greats like Schmeling and Dempsey passed their prime.
Gretzky – I really can’t think of a fifth, but from what I hear Gretzky is close to a no brainer. Hockey is not a sport I can comment on, but he seems to be the standard. What I like most is he played in an era with a couple other greats, yet his name remains the dominant one.
My criteria is “someone I would go out of my way to watch perform”.
Jordan – his desire to win was something to watch.
Ali – If an old fight ison I watch it no matter what
Tiger Woods – Tournaments just aren’t the same without him
Barry Sanders – there are many great football players but I loved watching him play – you never knew what was going to happen on any given play. Also pretty humble – just handed the ball over after a TD.
Lance Armstrong – such an inspiring story. I watched much of the last few Tour de France races that he was in. Looking forward to this year’s race.
I think Ruth was probably the greatest hitter of all time, but Mays was not far behind and brought so many more high-level aspects to his game than did Ruth. Nevertheless, you can argue for either one and not be far off the mark. Rey, great thoughts re:Jim Brown. He did run for 1800+ yards in 1963 (I think), long before 2000+ of Dicjerson in 1984 (?). I once had my picture taken with Brown; it appeared in the local newspaper (Amsterdam (NY) Evening Recorder). It was at the very beginning of his career. I lost the picture, but should look at their microfiche files some day to find it. Joe, Tiger Woods is an awesome addition. I only watch golf because of Tiger. Glad he’s back!
Pete –
I always hear about the “debate” that went on during late 50′s into 60′s about Mantle vs Mays … who was better in their prime??? Clearly, Mays would get your vote … what was it about Mays that pushes him above Mantle in your eyes?
Okay gang. The NHL consisted of six teams from 1924 to 1966. In 1965 a 16 year old from Parry Sound, Ontario appeared on the front cover of McLean’s (the Canadian equivalent of our Time). This kid had signed a contract with the Boston Bruins at the age of 14. News of the ‘Golden Boy’ created such a stir that the NHL was able to consider expanding after FOUR decades. Not only did the league expand – in this kid’s second season the number of teams in the league doubled. Two more joined three seasons later. A 12-team WHA came into existence in the early 70s. The WHA folded and what remained joined the NHL to make 21 teams. Yes – Bobby Orr was the back that the NHL was brokered on.
Take a moment and chew on these numbers. The NHL hadn’t seen a defenseman score 20 goals in over 20 years. Orr did it seven straight years. Five times he scored 30 goals, and he topped it all with a 46 goal season. Orr was not only the first defenseman to notch 100 assists in a season, he is THE ONLY defenseman to accomplish that feat. Orr accumulated over 100 points in six consecutive seasons. No defenseman in the history of the game has more than five total.
Orr is the only person in the history of the game to win the four major awards in ONE season – Art Ross (Scoring champion – yeah a defenseman led the league in scoring), Hart (Regular Season MVP), Norris (Top Defenseman), Conn Smythe (Playoff MVP).
Orr led Boston to its first Cup in 30 years, and the Bruins haven’t tasted the champagne yet. They won two before he was done.
Oh yeah – I almost forgot. Orr is second all-time in plus/minus. #4 had a +/- of 597 in 657 games. Larry Robinson (who played on some absolutely GREAT Canadien teams) needed 1384 games to get a +/- of 730. In case you’re wondering – Gretzky’s +/- is 518. Orr’s 70-71 season is still #1 in +/- at 124.
Has any athlete changed his/her game more than Orr? E.M. Swift wrote: “A defenseman by Orr, became both a defender and an aggressor, both a protector and a producer. Orr was more than an opportunist: He created opportunities.”
A Mount Rushmore of Sports without Bobby Orr is just not much to look up at.
Muhammad Ali – for much of the same reasons stated above.
Willie Mays – My dad told me soooo many stories about the ‘Say Hey’ Kid that I felt like I was born in the 50s.
John McEnroe – his performance in the 84 Wimbledon MIGHT be the single greatest performance in the history of sports.
Mike Krzyzewski – Basketball was around before him and basketball will be around long after he is gone, but thirty years from now (Pete will be in his 80s and still a part of this discussion) we will be talking about how great his contributions were. Right now – There are more players in the NBA from Duke than any other school. A former player is coaching a top ten team (Jeff capel /Oklahoma) and two other former players (Tommy Amaker / Harvard & Johnny Dawkins/Stanford) are getting the job done.
Wait a minute, Casey. There’s no way I’m going to let you get away with going to such great lengths to explain how Bobby Orr belongs on Mount Rushmore because of what he meant to his sport, then choose Willie Mays over Babe Ruth and Jackie Robinson.
Casey —
Bobby Orr was on my bubble list, and you made a great case for his support. But then I also thought about the Golden Jet, Bobby Hull, who was also of that era and did much to popularize the game at that time. Then add Gordie Howe to the list. All three of these guys are on the Mt Rushmore of hockey … no question about that. I definitely understand why you picked Orr.
Chas —
This is Casey’s list … there’s no right or wrong … only thing that matters is what works for him. Let’s see your list.
Casey, Orr was on my bubble list as well (amazing and scary how much Wally and I are thinking alike on this one)!
Wally, Mickey Mantle was my hero. He was the reason I even watched baseball and (back then – pre Maris) even rooted for the Yankees. Mick was fast, but Mays was faster, or at least more efficient with his speed. Mick could cover center, but Mays could cover it better. They could both hit for power and average, but Mays was a bit better. But probably the biggest Mays edge was freedom from injury. Mick just wasn’t as durable. It was a hard choice for me to make yesterday. I will say again that Ruth was the best hitter of all time, but not the best player.
Wow – Great conversation! Here is mine:
1. Wayne Gretzky – I had the privelege of watching him play twice. He was mesmerizing and simply the greatest hockey player I ever saw. Like Wally said -he made hockey popular in the United States.
This reminds me of a debate that Casey and I had a few years ago – that carried on for days. Who had more of an impact on their sport – Wayne Gretzky or Michael Jordan.. It was a great conversation..
2. Michael Jordan – Simply put – the best basketball player to grace our presence.
3. Bobby Jones – I know , I know Tiger Woods. But you look everywhere in golf and his fingerprints on the game are there. The only golfer to win the Grand Slam in the same year and his swing was a picture of beauty.
4. Willie Mays – If I was going for the sweetest swing or best hitter it would be Ted Willams. But the overall player has to be Willie Mays.
5. Muhammad Ali – For just about every reason stated above.
Chas
Point well-taken. Thank you for calling me out on that one. There is probably no more significant instance in American Sports of a player changing a game than Jackie Robinson.
JD spoke well of Jackie Robinson here: http://www.pickinsplinters.com/?p=109
In fact JD’s comments on that topic pre-dated our campaign of helmet stickers. I am giving a much overdue Helmet Sticker to JD!!!!
By the way – JD – great to have you ‘Ridin’ the Pine’ my Eye-Italian brother from another mother. It is great having you add some levity to the Bench now that your coaching responsibilities are done for the season. I am still jealous of your literary allusion.
As for Orr – his impact was on the entire playing surface. Yes Hull, Howe, and Gretzky were great offensive players, but none could match Orr’s artistry. Hull had an incredible slap shot, but (I only have limited access to old Hull videos) he needed someone to create that opportunity. Orr could line up behind his goaltender and weave his way up the ice with the puck dangling to his stick. The only comparison to that level on a playing surface is MJ.
Jackie Robinson’s impact – for me- was off the field. Should that put him on my Mt.? Probably – but he did not come to mind for me. Maybe that is my fault. As for Ruth – again he is not in my consciousness as much as Mays – dad could be a great story-teller when it came to Willie.
Of course I would love to continue debating this with you Chas. While some on the Pine might “fear it would morph into another long tangent,” I kinda thought that was the intended purpose: debate and understanding. Certainly it would increase the views on the site which could attract a wider audience which would mean more and more. I enjoy the prospect of being challenged which forces me to think about what I am saying and either developing a response or admitting that I am wrong.
In fact I would love to see a discussion about whether horse racing is a sport.
Part of me wants to McEnroe off my Mt.. Of course he would think that unfair and I could put him off to the side with his snarling puss.
Casey –
Hull was called the Golden Jet because he could REALLY skate, plus he had the cannon slapshot.
Mays worshippers–
Just playing Devil’s Advocate here … but If Mays was sooooo great, plus he played with several HoFers, then WHY didn’t his NY-SF Giants win more pennants and rings????? Riddle me me that, Batman.
Smitty — Great call on Bobby Jones!
Two concrete answers why the Giants didn’t win more rings/pennants: 1. Mays lost a whole season and the better part of another to military service. The next year he came back the Giants beat the Indians. 2. The Dodgers had more HOFers – Koufax, Dryesdale, Reese, Robinson, Campanella, and Snider. Not to mention Podres, Maglie, Newcombe – Who did I forget?
Just checking here – Bobby Orr could ‘REALLY skate’ too? Right?
Yes … I didn’t say he couldn’t … but I’m just pointing out that Orr wasn’t the only one who was a great skater and you made Hull sound like he was a statue waiting for a pass at the blue line. You’re starting to make Orr sound like he was on skates and everyone else was in slow motion wearing sneakers. Not true.
Ya know … if you keep defending Orr like this … we’re all gonna start feeling like he’s the “Hedo Turkoglu” of hockey. (Back me up on this, Smitty).
So Mays lost a year and a half out of a 20 year career … what about the other 18 years??? And did he not play with McCovey, Marichal, and Irvin … not to mention the legendary Alou brothers? Got any numbers on how the Say Hey Kid did in the post-season?
This is a good topic, Wally. If my comment wasn’t in the spirit of it, I apologize. That is, to question Casey’s pick without offering my own.
Speaking of which, I could come up with my own, and it would be very similar to Rey’s, except I’d probably take Ali over Louis. But, to be honest, I couldn’t care less about hockey and boxing (and even less about golf and horse racing), and I really don’t know who the football guy should be (Jim Brown is probably as good as it gets), and is there anybody who didn’t pick Michael Jordan? Casey, I guess, but he was obviously trying to be different by picking McEnroe and Coach K.
So, how about if I do a post on my baseball Mount Rushmore, since it’s been a couple weeks since I’ve posted anyway. I’ll wait until this discussion dies down, so as not to steal Wally’s thunder. Then, maybe Casey can assign, or otherwise determine who does the same for the other major sports. Maybe he does basketball, Wally football, Smitty hockey…or something like that. Hell, Rey could do soccer and the kids could do the college sports if we want to go overboard with this. We could get a lot of mileage out of this discussion.
What do you guys think?
Okay, I am going to play the role of Switzerland on this one and stay out of this one. Wally if you ask anyone in Boston – the greatest thing to hockey is and was Bobby Orr. I have a problem with Gretzky not being able to master the artistry of Bobby Orr. Gretzky’s vision of the ice was second to none and was a great skater in his own right.
He found guys open that very few – if any – could find open. That is why guys ike Jari Kurri and Glenn Anderson are in the hockey hall of fame.
Okay, maybe I didn’t play the role of Switzerland..
Interesting thought – if Ted Williams hadn’t lost 5 years of playing to multiple wars – would we have been talking about Hank Aaron and Barry Bonds having to pass Ted Williams as the all-time HR leader?
Chas – I am all for it..
Smitty – my grandfather (a NY Giants fan) used to make the same argument about Willie Mays. Let’s take a look.
Mays hit 660 HR is his career. He lost most of 1952-53 to the war. Based on his HR/AB in 1951 and 1954, I project he would have hit 33 per year in 520 AB. So, if we add 66 to 660 and then subtract the 4 that he actually hit, it comes to 722. So, Mays may very well have broken Ruth’s record in 1973, and then lost the crown to Aaron in 1974, but that’s about it.
Williams hit 521 HR. He lost all of 1943-45 to WWII. Since he hit 36 and 38 in 1942 and 1946, respectively (in 522 and 514 AB), I simply credited him with 37 per year (111 total). For 1952-53, by the same methodology, he was also hitting HR at a rate of 37 per 520 AB. So, 37 times 2 minus the 14 he actually hit is another 60. Add 111 and 60 to 521 and we get 692. So, probably not.
Now, the real discussion is how many HR would Babe Ruth have hit if he hadn’t spent 1914-1918 as a pitcher? Harder to tell, because it was the beginning of the live-ball era, but I assure you that as a snot-nose little Yankee fan, that was my response to grandpa’s Willie Mays argument.
So many good thoughts. Good discussion. I found it hard to exclude Jim Thorpe from my Rushmore. In my mind he was the greatest athlete ever. He even won ballroom dancing contests. There was nothing physical that man could not do well. I am beginning to realize that my criteria has to do with impact, and more specifically impact on USA. That’s why I would not add Pele to my list. His impact was international, but in the USA it was nil (almost)
As to horse racing, it is certainly a sport. It is one of the earliest sports. It is the sport of kings. Now, are racehorses athletes? That’s the debatable point. Read Seabiscuit by Laura Hillenbrand (I rate it as one of the 5 best books I have ever read – not alone on that; it spent a long time at the top of the NY Times bestseller list) and see for yourself if Seabiscuit doesn’t fit our usual definitions of athletes in every respect; physical prowess, competitiveness, and mental toughness. BUT, horse racing is a sport, regardless of whether the horse is an athlete or not.
Horse racing is NOT a “sport”. It’s a race between horses, not humans. Is it a game? Yes. A contest? Yes. A pastime? Yes. Are the horses amazing creatures? Yes. BUT …. Per Wally’s definition of “sport”, it falls short.
IMO, Ted Williams is the best pure hitter in baseball history. For average, OBP, and power, I really don’t think anyone else comes close …. except maybe Balco Bonds and he’s got a zillion asterisks by his name. Yes, the two wars really hurt Ted’s totals. Anyway, Ruth is still my baseball Rushmore rep … because of the “Ruthian” numbers and also because of the significant intangibles. He really made baseball the “National Pastime”.
Main Entry: sport
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 a: a source of diversion : recreation b: sexual play c (1): physical activity engaged in for pleasure (2): a particular activity (as an athletic game) so engaged in
2 a: pleasantry , jest b: often mean-spirited jesting : mockery , derision
3 a: something tossed or driven about in or as if in play b: laughingstock
4 a: sportsman b: a person considered with respect to living up to the ideals of sportsmanship c: a companionable person
5: an individual exhibiting a sudden deviation from type beyond the normal limits of individual variation usually as a result of mutation especially of somatic tissue
So, since it’s definition #1 we’re pretty much talking about here, horse racing IS a sport. However, according to #4, a horse is not a sportsman because it’s not a person. That segue-ways to the next definition…
Main Entry: ath·lete
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin athleta, from Greek athlētēs, from athlein to contend for a prize, from athlon prize, contest
Date: 15th century
: a person who is trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina
I agree with Merriam-Webster that horse racing is a sport, but a horse is not an athlete by virtue of not being a person. But, then again, Merriam-Webster is only one opinion, just like mine or Wally’s or Pete’s.
Are jockeys athletes?
Wally, if we want to abide by “your” definition of sport, then we certainly can abide by “my” definition of athlete. Fact is, “our” definitions don’t count for much. Dictionary definitions would designate racing as a sport and horses as not athletes. So it just comes down to opinion (on the bench anyway). Seabiscuit still has my vote. And I fully realize that it is an unsupported stand. Still a great book though.
Chas — Thanks for all the research. Per Wally’s Post-Collegiate Dictionary, “jockeys” are “very small people who sit on race horses and beat them with a whip stick; not athletes.”
Pete — I’m willing to work with you on this in the “spirit of the post” cuz I’m starting to laugh too much
I’m surprised Hedo Turkoglu did not at least make Casey’s Rushmore Bubble List for his basketball rep. Smitty … you too?
Wally
You’re starting to sound desperate. The whole Turkoglu reference is a last gasp diversionary tactic that is losing emphasis. For the love of God stop using it in this thread. It was remotely funny, but the humor is diminishing into pity at this point.
Wait!
This thread has officially fallen into the category of one that would “morph into another long tangent.”
Ah yes – “The Pine” shuddered when Wally and Pete agreed. Last time that happened Wally declared himself right…..in his own mind.
Did I say that out loud?
Oh yeah – hey Smitty!!!! Let’s try your “vision on the ice” theory if Gretzky had to advance the puck 200 feet.
Release the hounds!!!!!
Wally get it right this time. Release this hounds in the context of this thread means I know I am in disagreement with others, so I expect people to come after me. Thus the hounds are coming after me in a hunt. Do ya get it?
Well, it’s been fun and this post has certainly gotten us firmly into the weekend. I’d still like to see more posts from the readers who haven’t replied on who is on their “Mount Rushmore of Sports” and/or we could shift gears as was suggested and go sport by sport. Casey, how would you like to proceed?
And I vow not to use the Hedo Turkoglu reference …. for at least a month
Where to go from here?
Gee – I’d like to hear from Chas. Any white elephants here for you Chas. After all he was trimmed for questioning my Willie nomination with a “This is Casey’s list … there’s no right or wrong … only thing that matters is what works for him.” This after Chas published an all-time list that was entitled with the word ‘MY.’ I’m thinking that means in his opinion – something that is rather subjective, yet he was taken to task on his picks…particularly about 2nd base.
Hey, for me it’s BIG that Wally is willing to work with me on this one. Considering the amazing similarities in our original Rushmore (Seabiscuit notwithstanding) and even our bubble list, it seemed only natural that we could work a truce on this one. One thing I do know for sure; my opinion is often “out there” and unsupported by anything but my gut feelings. So it is when it comes to Seabiscuit! BTW, is hunting a sport; it’s done by sportsmen?
Casey, what do you think of this idea?
http://www.pickinsplinters.com/?p=2307&cpage=1#comment-3934
I like it. Go with it.
Will Ryne Sandberg be on yours?
That was just too friggin’ easy.
I almost used that one earlier. If I did a Mount Rushmore of second basemen from the second half of the 20th century: Yes…probably.
HELMET STICKER!!!!!!!!
Wait I was laughing so hard it took me 60 seconds to press the ‘enter’ key.
Pete has a question on the table. Gentlemen is there a response?
You guys are hilarious. Please stop and start something “serious”.
Anyway … hunting? Not a sport! I think it’s a hobby done by guys who like guns. Or guys that like to eat. Or both. That’s my vote.
I just thought that being done by “sportsmen” would qualify it. Hard to tell; some definitions are so ambiguous. But no, seriously, isn’t it a sport? Wouldn’t a sport be defined in it’s simplest form as “something done by a sportsman”? Point is, definitions are personalized, even in Webster’s. Hence we DO have a serious discussion; setting the ground rules for opinionated discussions. Wally, I completely accept your vote on hunting. I just think your vote disagrees with the “definition”. Well, I’m off to NASCAR.com. Got to see who qualified in a REAL sport, a MAN’S sport. TIC (tongue-in-cheek), though I do follow NASCAR. Aren’t those cars athletes, or is it the driver?
Now, Pete, I will agree that race car drivers are at least “more athletic” than horse jockeys. I’m not a racing fan, cuz I think the car and the mechanics do the real work and it often really boils down to who is lucky enough to avoid a crash.
Plus, going around in circles bores me to tears.
Out of curiosity – Wally? How much hunting have you done? Isn’t marksmanship part of at least one Olympic event? Since you have characterized hunting by saying it’s “for guys that like to eat” – how do you describe a high percentage of golfers in the U.S.?
“…NASCAR. Aren’t those cars athletes, or is it the driver?”
That’s my vote for comment of the week.
I think hunting is a sport, auto racing is a sport, bowling is a sport, etc. They’re just not sports that require a great deal of athleticism. Archery is an olympic sport, right? And, there’s some other olympic sport that involves shooting a rifle, right?
Speaking of which, were there any amateur athletes mentioned? What about Eric Heiden, Mark Spitz, Jim Craig, Michael Phelps, Jesse Owens? Just throwin’ it out there.
BTW Wally, my Ryne Sandberg comment was serious. It was intended to be funny, of course, but it was a serious statement. Being one of the top 5 second baseman of half a century is not an insult. It’s not like I said if I did a Mount Rushmore of Mets third basemen, Wayne Garrett would sneak in.
Ooohhh – Jesse Owens- wow. There are a few more greats that I haven’t mentioned, but I know a couple of folks who will hopefully come on and comment.
Oh yeah – Wally – the legendary Alou brothers? They combined for about 300 home runs, a .290 BA, and 0 Gold Gloves. But hey Matty Alou led the league one year by making 503 outs.
Chas – don’t worry I didn’t overlook your Casey’s-trying-to-be-different-by-putting McEnroe-and-Coach-K-on-his-Mt. comment. I just haven’t worked up a response yet.
Interesting that my wife’s Mt. Rushmore included both Owens and Phelps. whereas neither occurred to me. Maybe we should have a Rushmore for pros and one for amateurs. My amateur Rushmore: Owens, Grange (at Illinois), Thorpe (at Carlisle), Lew Alcindor (at UCLA), and Sugar Ray Leonard (in the Olympics).
Once again Pete – you da man! I debated over Sugar Ray Leonard for a considerable time. As JD will tell you, Sugar Ray was my favorite growing up. I actually hated Ali at the time. Took me a while to understand everything going on at the time.
Pete
Since you bring up Sugar Ray – JD and I were talking today about boxing. To me the Golden Age of Boxing was the 70s(with a little bit of the 80s) – ’76 Olympic team, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Cooney, Jimmy Young, Teofiolo Stevenson, Roberto Duran, Thomas Hearns, Marvin Hagler. Everything since then he been the mess created by Don King and Mike Tyson. Has boxing ever had a period of time better than that of the 70s?
Leonard had an impact at the Olympic level that Ali could not achieve until he was a pro. Some bubble list amateurs: Mia Hamm (at UNC), Carl Lewis, Magic Johnson (MSU) and Larry Bird (ISU).
Carl Lewis would have to go on my amateur MT. Rushmore as would Edwin Moses.
The only thing about Lewis and Moses is that track athletes walk a fine line when it comes to amateur/pro status. As to boxing at it’s height? The 20′s – 30′s is referred to often as the Golden Age of sports. Guys like Ruth and Gehrig and Grange and Owens and Tunney and Louis and Seabiscuit and War Admiral were renowned celebrities who were virtually idolized. While the boxing of the ’70s is certainly better than the multiple-organization, Mike Tyson fiascoes of today, they do not measure up to boxing as an attraction in the Golden Age.
Gotta give my Mt. Rushmore before I read all of the comments:
Overall…
Pele
Babe Ruth
Wayne Gretsky
Magic Johnson
because they all made their sport relavent to an American audience
now I will read the other respnses and comment further…
sorry, my 5th is:
Hank Aaron
for all those home runs, and knocking down the doors that Jackie wasn’t able to finish off
How about a non-athlete Rushmore (once we define what an athlete is)?
John Wooden
Knite Rockne
Pete Rozelle
Vince Lombardi
Branch Rickey
Seems heavily loaded with football people. Notice; no race horses or race cars. They are athletes!
George Halas was on my original list, but he’s bubble status. Krzyzewski is not Wooden-esque (yet). Steinbrenner deserves consideration, but I would never put him on my list just on the principle of the matter.
Sorry for the typo on Rockne; meant Knute.
Muels, I bubbled Pele for the very reason that you included him – his impact in USA. He certainly seemed to heighten our awareness of soccer in this country, but soccer’s still not relevant to the mainstream.
I am going to do a post with my baseball Mount Rushmore, but here are my picks for all sports, admitting my limited knowledge of some sports:
Athletes:
Babe Ruth
Muhammad Ali
Michael Jordan (just realized he’s not in the HOF yet)
Wayne Gretsky
Jim Brown
Real original, I realize. Don’t worry my baseball picks will be more interesting.
Non-athletes:
Joe Paterno
John Wooden
Vince Lombardi
Branch Rickey
Red Auerbach
Must add Howard Cosell to my bubble of non-athletes.
Chas, Auerbach is a brilliant addition. Don’t know why he did not occur to me. Makes me also wonder why Russell or Chamberlain have not appeared on any one’s Rushmore. Speaks to the awesomeness of Jordan I guess.
All bubble people because their impact is not usually on mainstream society (Wooden and Rockne are exceptions), but how about the builders of college dynasties:
Anson Dorrance – UNC Women’s soccer;
Pat Summit and Gino Auriemma ( I can’t stand him) in Women’s basketball;
Paul “Bear” Bryant;
Dean Smith and Mike Krzyszewski;
Dan Gable (Iowa wrestling).
Ooo, Pete – I like where this is going. Your Dan Gable pick reminded me of another wrestling great.
I’m going to take us back to the amatuer athletes and throw in Cael Sanderson. Only four time national champion and NEVER lost a collegiate match (159-0) while wrestling at Iowa State. He also won an Olympic gold.
Joe Paterno?!?!?!?
Sorry … that’s right … there are no wrong answers … only what works for Chas. Repeat after me … there are no …
Well, let’s see Wally…
*The winningest coach in D-1 history.
*The most bowl victories of any coach in D-1 history.
*The most undefeated seasons of any coach in D-1 history.
*One of the few D-1 coaches who is a true leader of student-athletes, consistently graduating players at rates well above the national average.
*Has donated over $4 million over the course of his career to his institution. As a result, the expansion of the college’s main library is named after him.
Seems to exemplify that definition of sportsman that was discussed earlier.
That comment gets my nomination for the most passive-aggressive and hypocritical comment I’ve seen on here.
ND’s Mt. Rushmore of coaches:
Ty Willingham
Bob Davie
Gerry Faust
George O’Leary
Rey, I see fatherhood has made you quite the comedian. Those ND coaches aren’t rushmore, they’re not passmore. they’re just losemore. Good addition with Sanderson.
I’m just bustin’ chops. I graduated from Temple, where most HS teams could compete with us.
Chas – HELMET STICKER!!!!!!!
Chas –
First of all, Joe Pa is a great CFB coach/icon. Don’t get me wrong … I respect him a great deal. But when it comes to talking about the “greatest CFB coach in history” (other post) most wins doesn’t do it for me. You’re gonna have a boatload of wins in 43 years. Neither do undefeated seasons. Bowl games, shmowl games. Remember, Penn State was hiding out in the east for several decades when the only decent teams out there were Pitt and maybe Syracuse … once in a while. So they beat the crap out of the eastern powers Kent State, Temple (sorry Rey), Cinci and Ohio U every year until the big game vs Pitt came up. For decades, Penn State was a school that could look pretty good record wise while not really being all that good. Until joining the Big 10, being the Beast of the East was more akin to being the best AAA baseball team. But their fan base sees 10-2 consistently every year and thinks the coach is the best thing since the Beatles. This is not to say PSU didn’t have some great teams … they certainly did in the ’80s. But … sorry … if you’re gonna coach since ’66, I would hope you’d have at least 3-4 National titles to your credit in order to be hailed as the “greatest CFB coach ever”. I think more credit goes to the Penn State administration for not firing him after a couple instances of consecutive losing seasons. Most “football powers” woulda kicked Joe out 3 or 4 times since ’66.
Your passion for JoPa is commendable … and you’re certainly entitled to have him on your MRoS. I was just shocked to see him on there with Wooden, Auerbach and Lombardi, who are all great (multiple) champions … but since I now know you’re a PSU grad … it makes sense.
Wally, in defense of Joe Pa on MRoS he IS the Penn State program. When I look at UNC or Duke or Kansas basketball or Alabama or OSU or USC football I see PROGRAMS that have flourished under many coaches, but at PSU only one man has been responsible for all their success. When he leaves, we may find that it is the program, not the man. But for now, I see him Rushmore-worthy. And the longevity thing, that adds to the worthiness. Is he the best football coach ever? Not as long as the name Rockne is remembered. Is he the best today? You can make an argument for that case. But without a doubt, he is Rushmore material. He is an icon, better known in the USA than is Saban or Meyer or Weis or Carroll. BTW, when he came to Spencerport HS to secure Al Zematais’ signature on a letter of intent, I was introduced to him as the “ND guy”. He took time to chat with me, part of which was later quoted in the Rochester paper (“ND, nice little prep school, that”), but he impressed me no end with his personality and with his physical size. He was so much bigger than he seems on tv. When he left that day, before he exited the building he had to find the ND guy to say good bye. Rushmore or not, best ever or not, he will always be one of my favorites.
6 of 8 people above put Wayne Gretzky on their Mt.. I guess that is a majority if such a thing can happen when the sample size is 8. Of course 1 of the 6 admitted to not knowing much about hockey.
So what I have here falls under Pete’s ‘unsupported by anything other than gut feelings.’ Well maybe a little more than gut feelings.
Looking at the NHL record books – ‘The Great One’ holds nine of the top eleven all-time single-season point totals. I am saying this up front because I don’t want anyone to think I am ignoring those facts. Yes, Gretzky’s point totals by season rank 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,10,11.
But time can possess that unique ability to diminish the importance of some details.
For the 1979-80 season the NHL had it right. During that campaign teams played as close to a balanced schedule as possible – with 21 teams playing 80 games there would be some minor disparity. Then in the playoffs they seeded teams 1-16 and waged war. There were no divisional playoffs, no conference play – it was the NHL playoffs. And the two best teams advanced to the finals.
After that season the NHL went to an imbalanced schedule which is to say each team would play 8 games against each opponent in their division – or 32 of their regular season games. The remaining 48 games would be divided up by playing the other 15 teams – the extra three games stayed within the conference.
This is relevant because? Edmonton played in the Campbell Conference’s Smythe Division. The other teams in that division? The Vancouver canucks, Los Angeles Kings, Calgary Flames, and the Colorado Rockies. For the first half of the 80s it was rare that any team other than Edmonton had a winning record in that division. In fact for 81-82 season the Minnesota North Stars were the only other team in the entire conference to have a winning record.
Meanwhile in the Prince of Wales Conference – 7 of the 10 teams posted records above .500 Why the disparity? The Prince of Wales was a FAR superior conference.
The Montreal Candiens, who finished first in the Adams Division went 10-3-2 vs. teams in the Smythe. The Philly Flyers who finished 3rd in the Patrick went 9-4-2. Even the lowly Washington Capitals who finished dead last in the Patrick went 6-6-2 vs. the Smythe. The Caps finished the year 26-41-13. They had almost 25% of their season wins in less than 19% of their games.
The following season – the same conditions existed. The next year the Flames nosed above .500. The division improved from there.
Is it possible that if the Oilers had to play in the Prince of Wales Conference Gretzky’s numbers would be more… mortal – like?
Gretzky nor the Oilers are to blame. No one is to blame. Those were the conditions, and he/they thrived.
Something else to consider – Gretzky led the league in assists an astounding 16 times establishing the record of 163 in a season. The last four times he led the league with under 100. In fact 67 was good enough in the 97-98 season. Do you think the style of play changed a little? That is to say that after the league did everything in its power to increase scoring in the 80s, teams started to figure out how to slow down play?
I am not suggesting that Gretzky or the Oilers should have done anything differently. They played the hand they were dealt and played it very well. But I am suggesting that Gretzky’s numbers need to be put into context of the league he was playing in at that time.
Wonder what would happen if we invited in…let’s say…50 Edmonton Oiler fans from the 80s? Of course we would have to warn them of the Wally effect – that anything not in Wally’s conscious mind is liable to be dismissed. But if we brought in these 50, I wonder how many would agree. Do you think any Oiler fans would put mark Messier on their MT.? After all Messier did sip from the Cup two more times than ‘The Great One.’
Don’t get me wrong – on the offensive end of the ice Gretzky was stunning. He created play-making from behind the opponent’s goal. It was a duh moment for everyone because we all realized someone should have done this before. But numbers are just that figures – on paper, screen or whatever.
Without a context numbers can be misleading.
So forgive me as we stand in front of the Gretzky monument. I will remain respectful and bow. But I won’t genuflect.
I knew the lack of national championships would be held against him. Admittedly, the three undefeated seasons prior to the 80s were before my time, so I really don’t know to what extent they were disrespected by not getting a shot at a national championship.
As far as Knute Rockne is concerned, I don’t know much about college football pre-1930, so to me comparing Rockne to Paterno is like comparing John McGraw to Sparky Anderson.
What I do know is that Joe Paterno’s record vs. Notre Dame is 9 wins, 6 losses. ‘Nuff said.
Wow – let me see if I can catch up to speed..
For my amateur Rushmore – I would include Ernie Davis. I didn’t see his name being mentioned anywhere here, but by all accounts – he was better then Jim Brown and certainly knocked down some monumental doors by being the first African American to win the Heisman Trophy.
As for hunting. I believe there is certainly a level of sport in hunting/shooting. Especially when you look at Olympians that cross country skiing for miles, stop have to hit a target, continue skiing and then hit another target.
To compare hunting to golf ? No way.. To be a competitive golfer you have to be a very good athlete. Sure some guys can get away with being a little overweight, but more and more that is changing with the game of golf. Think about it – on average, these players are walking about 8-10 miles per day. From there, they are skilled enough with their hand and the golf clubs to shape shots based on what the hole dictates. Shot from 150 yards – guys can hit it 152 and get to spin back to within 3 or 4 feet of the hole. Get in trouble – guys have to use strength and imagination to get themselves out of it.
Putting? Guys have to read slope, grain of the green, conditions (wet or dry) and judge speed, angle and then hit the put accurately. Hunting certainly takes some skill to hit a target , but for a majority of hunters – they hike to their “area”, sit in a tree stand, change their diapers and wait for that one target to come along. Don’t compare it to golf..
Non-Athlete Rushmore:
John Wooden
Knute Rockne
Scotty Bowman
Branch Rickey
Vince Lombardi
Amateur Athletes:
Jesse Owens
Eric Heiden
Ernie Davis
Mia Hamm
Michael Phelps
Chas – jut saw you mentioned Branch Rickey on here.. And I was thinking that I was going to be the only one listing him on here..
Great minds think alike..
I remember seeing skeet-shooting on the ABC Wide World of Sports and thinking there was NO WAY I could hit that target.
Smitty, I also had Rickey on my non-athlete list (the first one posted). Digging for a little credit here. However, BIG credit to you for Ernie Davis. Awesome addition to the amateur list.
BTW, Smitty, our non-athlete list is almost identical except for my Pete Rozelle vs your Scotty Bowman. You might think somewhat like the great mind of Chas, but you are WAY TOO close to the brain-dead thinking of this old man. Sorry bud!
Casey —
At the moment, YOU are not in my conscious mind. Therefore, YOU are dismissed. (ref. “Wally Effect” in action … see comment #74).
Out.
Pete – I can handle being compared to both worlds – A little bit of the “new school” thinking and a little bit of the ” not so old – old school”.
I consider it a compliment to be on the same wave length with everyone on this site..
Sorry, I didn’t see you put Branch Rickey down before.. There are so many posts on this thread – I had a hard time catching up.
I thought about Pete Rozelle too.. I also thought about David Stern, as he has certainly brought the NBA to new heights.
Holy Harry Sinden, Batman!!! Check out the huge write up in the March 2 Sports Illustrated on “The Elusive Bobby Orr” by S.L. Price. Foreward was written by P.C. Gotham. (jk).
I guess Casey left your conscious mind for all of an hour and a quarter, Wally. He’s a hard habit to break, huh?
It’s difficult because he’s in the subconscious … part of my underworld.
Wally, thanks for the original Rushmore post. I have had a lot of fun on it the past few days. Woke up a part of my brain that often lies dormant nowadays. I just wish you guys were passionate about your opinions (TIC)!
Thanks, Pete. Looks like we all got a lot of mileage out of it. I enjoyed it even though I got run over a few times. Nothing like a good debate, I say
As long as you didn’t get run over by “them thar NASCAR athletes”! The debates were certainly lively, and we may have set an untouchable record for most comments on a topic.