[yvonne]

I see Richard Sherman on an open post-game mike the same way I saw John McEnroe on centre court at Wimbledon.  Both are/were serious players.  Both were/are close to being the best at their sport, but not clearly the best, in either case.

Wait McEnroe won the Grand Slam in 1983-84, at a time when the Australian Open was in December. He held the ATP world No 1 ranking for four years. If that's not clearly the best in his time, I don't know what is.

[yvonne]

I see Richard Sherman on an open post-game mike the same way I saw John McEnroe on centre court at Wimbledon.  Both are/were serious players.  Both were/are close to being the best at their sport, but not clearly the best, in either case.

Wait McEnroe won the Grand Slam in 1983-84, at a time when the Australian Open was in December. He held the ATP world No 1 ranking for four years. If that's not clearly the best in his time, I don't know what is.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=9438.msg82332#msg82332 date=1390328619]
I see Richard Sherman on an open post-game mike the same way I saw John McEnroe on centre court at Wimbledon.  Both are/were serious players.  Both were/are close to being the best at their sport, but not clearly the best, in either case.

Wait McEnroe won the Grand Slam in 1983-84, at a time when the Australian Open was in December. He held the ATP world No 1 ranking for four years. If that's not clearly the best in his time, I don't know what is.
[/quote]

I'm also not sure how someone can say that Sherman isn't clearly the best this year. Is there any argument for anyone else? I haven't seen any.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=9438.msg82332#msg82332 date=1390328619]
I see Richard Sherman on an open post-game mike the same way I saw John McEnroe on centre court at Wimbledon.  Both are/were serious players.  Both were/are close to being the best at their sport, but not clearly the best, in either case.

Wait McEnroe won the Grand Slam in 1983-84, at a time when the Australian Open was in December. He held the ATP world No 1 ranking for four years. If that's not clearly the best in his time, I don't know what is.
[/quote]

I'm also not sure how someone can say that Sherman isn't clearly the best this year. Is there any argument for anyone else? I haven't seen any.

[Stymie]

Yvonne

McEnroe never won the Australian or French Open, so he never held the "grand slam," regardless as to how one defines it.  He was for a brief while #1 in the world computerwise, but if you know tennis and look back without rose (or cardinal)-colored glasses you'd be hard to see him as better than Borg or more than an equal of Connors or Lendl during his day.  History-wise he is top-20, but just barely.  Can't see him being better (in their prime) than Borg, Sampras, Federer, Djokovich, Nadal, Sampras, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales (probably all-time #1), Kramer, Tilden, Perry, Hoad, Budge, etc. etc.

Sherman is a wannabe greatest corner-back, and god bless him for wanting to be so and trying so hard to convince all of us that he is so.  Maybe he will be the Gonzales of all time, or maybe just the McEnroe of his time.  Regardless, either would be a great achievement.

Stymie

[Stymie]

Yvonne

McEnroe never won the Australian or French Open, so he never held the "grand slam," regardless as to how one defines it.  He was for a brief while #1 in the world computerwise, but if you know tennis and look back without rose (or cardinal)-colored glasses you'd be hard to see him as better than Borg or more than an equal of Connors or Lendl during his day.  History-wise he is top-20, but just barely.  Can't see him being better (in their prime) than Borg, Sampras, Federer, Djokovich, Nadal, Sampras, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales (probably all-time #1), Kramer, Tilden, Perry, Hoad, Budge, etc. etc.

Sherman is a wannabe greatest corner-back, and god bless him for wanting to be so and trying so hard to convince all of us that he is so.  Maybe he will be the Gonzales of all time, or maybe just the McEnroe of his time.  Regardless, either would be a great achievement.

Stymie

[washingtonismoney]

McEnroe never won the Australian or French Open, so he never held the "grand slam..."

Tennis players didn't take completing the grand slam quite as seriously as they do these days. Both McEnroe and Borg skipped numerous Australian Opens; McEnroe didn't play between '77-82, then in '84, '86-'88 and '91.

McEnroe was often the best player in his era; Sherman is the best corner in the game.

[washingtonismoney]

McEnroe never won the Australian or French Open, so he never held the "grand slam..."

Tennis players didn't take completing the grand slam quite as seriously as they do these days. Both McEnroe and Borg skipped numerous Australian Opens; McEnroe didn't play between '77-82, then in '84, '86-'88 and '91.

McEnroe was often the best player in his era; Sherman is the best corner in the game.

[jacketree]

"Hands of Stone"

Prepping for a big teleconference in 55 minutes. (What can't you tell? There are more windows than this one.)  Thinking about going full Sherminator and calling one of my competitors "sorry" or at the least "mediocre" in front of the entire AT&T teleconference room.  I'll let you know how it goes.

[jacketree]

"Hands of Stone"

Prepping for a big teleconference in 55 minutes. (What can't you tell? There are more windows than this one.)  Thinking about going full Sherminator and calling one of my competitors "sorry" or at the least "mediocre" in front of the entire AT&T teleconference room.  I'll let you know how it goes.

[yvonne]

Yvonne

McEnroe never won the Australian or French Open, so he never held the "grand slam," regardless as to how one defines it. 

You're right. I misread his Wikipedia page.

He was for a brief while #1 in the world computerwise, but if you know tennis and look back without rose (or cardinal)-colored glasses you'd be hard to see him as better than Borg or more than an equal of Connors or Lendl during his day.  History-wise he is top-20, but just barely.  Can't see him being better (in their prime) than Borg, Sampras, Federer, Djokovich, Nadal, Sampras, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales (probably all-time #1), Kramer, Tilden, Perry, Hoad, Budge, etc. etc.

His ATP page says he  won [the US Open] for the last time in 1984, over Lendl. But he was defeated in the Flushing Meadow rematch 12 months later, relinquishing to Lendl the World No. 1 ranking McEnroe had held for four years."

I'd say that's a little longer than "a brief while."

Borg and McEnroe played an epic five setter with two tie breaks in Wimbledon in 1980, with Borg winning. The following year, McEnroe won in a four setter that also had two tie-breaks.


You can say what you want about McEnroe's temper, and you would be correct. As a tennis player, he wasn't the wannabe that you're portraying him as. From 1980-1984, he was the best.

[yvonne]

Yvonne

McEnroe never won the Australian or French Open, so he never held the "grand slam," regardless as to how one defines it. 

You're right. I misread his Wikipedia page.

He was for a brief while #1 in the world computerwise, but if you know tennis and look back without rose (or cardinal)-colored glasses you'd be hard to see him as better than Borg or more than an equal of Connors or Lendl during his day.  History-wise he is top-20, but just barely.  Can't see him being better (in their prime) than Borg, Sampras, Federer, Djokovich, Nadal, Sampras, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales (probably all-time #1), Kramer, Tilden, Perry, Hoad, Budge, etc. etc.

His ATP page says he  won [the US Open] for the last time in 1984, over Lendl. But he was defeated in the Flushing Meadow rematch 12 months later, relinquishing to Lendl the World No. 1 ranking McEnroe had held for four years."

I'd say that's a little longer than "a brief while."

Borg and McEnroe played an epic five setter with two tie breaks in Wimbledon in 1980, with Borg winning. The following year, McEnroe won in a four setter that also had two tie-breaks.


You can say what you want about McEnroe's temper, and you would be correct. As a tennis player, he wasn't the wannabe that you're portraying him as. From 1980-1984, he was the best.

[Hulk01]

Stymie, It seems you would have to have glasses in a color other than Cardinal to insist that McEnroe would barely crack the all-time top 20.  The most respected poll ever conducted ranked as its top ten:

Federer
Laver
Sampras
Nadal
Borg
Budge
Agassi
McEnroe
Connors
Tilden

Kramer, Hoad, and Gonzales in a class with McEnroe?  Kramer and Hoad combined had only as many Grand Slam wins (7) as McEnroe, who had five more Grand Slam wins that Pancho, who ranked 22nd in that poll.  You might think that a man for whom the most famous racquet in tennis is named might be Mc's equal, but I've never heard anyone who thought that, not least of all because tennis was much more competitive in Mc's peak years than in any of those guys.  I've never heard that disputed, either.

[Hulk01]

Stymie, It seems you would have to have glasses in a color other than Cardinal to insist that McEnroe would barely crack the all-time top 20.  The most respected poll ever conducted ranked as its top ten:

Federer
Laver
Sampras
Nadal
Borg
Budge
Agassi
McEnroe
Connors
Tilden

Kramer, Hoad, and Gonzales in a class with McEnroe?  Kramer and Hoad combined had only as many Grand Slam wins (7) as McEnroe, who had five more Grand Slam wins that Pancho, who ranked 22nd in that poll.  You might think that a man for whom the most famous racquet in tennis is named might be Mc's equal, but I've never heard anyone who thought that, not least of all because tennis was much more competitive in Mc's peak years than in any of those guys.  I've never heard that disputed, either.

[dolores.runner]

a)Sherman doesn't represent Stanford. He went to Stanford some time ago. Very different.
b)He's a professional football player; an entertainer, like a professional wrestler. Trash talk sells beer to pro football fans.
c)He apologized
d)He and Crabtree have a definite history. A little taunt at the end of the game is nothing
e)personally, I think he cheats all the time on his coverage, holding, etc., but I don't care if the refs don't. Whatever, he's the best.

[dolores.runner]

a)Sherman doesn't represent Stanford. He went to Stanford some time ago. Very different.
b)He's a professional football player; an entertainer, like a professional wrestler. Trash talk sells beer to pro football fans.
c)He apologized
d)He and Crabtree have a definite history. A little taunt at the end of the game is nothing
e)personally, I think he cheats all the time on his coverage, holding, etc., but I don't care if the refs don't. Whatever, he's the best.

[needle]

In any discussion of the "best tennis player of all time," Gonzalez is named among a group that includes Bill Tilden, Ellsworth Vines, Rod Laver, Jack Kramer, Budge, Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe. He was inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1968.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/05/obitua...at-67.html

[needle]

In any discussion of the "best tennis player of all time," Gonzalez is named among a group that includes Bill Tilden, Ellsworth Vines, Rod Laver, Jack Kramer, Budge, Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe. He was inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1968.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/05/obitua...at-67.html

[pefloresjr]

Conan had a funny take on the Sherman interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UruhkJ_7F8

Cheers,
Pete F. 

[pefloresjr]

Conan had a funny take on the Sherman interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UruhkJ_7F8

Cheers,
Pete F. 

[Mick]

I see Richard Sherman on an open post-game mike the same way I saw John McEnroe on centre court at Wimbledon.  Both are/were serious players.  Both were/are close to being the best at their sport, but not clearly the best, in either case.  Both strive(d) to be the best, and in doing so did not suffer fools gladly, whether these fools were myopic line judges or out of their depth TV interviewers.

If every great athlete who attended and competed for Stanford were like some of oor faves (e.g. Andrew) we would be a different place, but not necessarily in a better place.

As Kojak said (or should have said) "Diversity, Baby!"

...Sherman graduated from Stanford.

[Mick]

I see Richard Sherman on an open post-game mike the same way I saw John McEnroe on centre court at Wimbledon.  Both are/were serious players.  Both were/are close to being the best at their sport, but not clearly the best, in either case.  Both strive(d) to be the best, and in doing so did not suffer fools gladly, whether these fools were myopic line judges or out of their depth TV interviewers.

If every great athlete who attended and competed for Stanford were like some of oor faves (e.g. Andrew) we would be a different place, but not necessarily in a better place.

As Kojak said (or should have said) "Diversity, Baby!"

...Sherman graduated from Stanford.

[PrinceLightfoot]

Sherman is a wannabe greatest corner-back...

I do not understand this statement at all. He is unquestionably the best corner back in the league, and opposing offenses this post season have proven that they do respect him greatly having targeted the receiver he covered only 8% of the time.

https://twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/status...6467785728

[PrinceLightfoot]

Sherman is a wannabe greatest corner-back...

I do not understand this statement at all. He is unquestionably the best corner back in the league, and opposing offenses this post season have proven that they do respect him greatly having targeted the receiver he covered only 8% of the time.

https://twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/status...6467785728

[PrinceLightfoot]

The title of this thread angers me every time I read it. Are we really so quick to judge others without fully understanding the context of a situation while we observe from our well cushioned seats? Richard Sherman's interview with Rachel Nichols explains it all well.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/...w.cnn.html

[PrinceLightfoot]

The title of this thread angers me every time I read it. Are we really so quick to judge others without fully understanding the context of a situation while we observe from our well cushioned seats? Richard Sherman's interview with Rachel Nichols explains it all well.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/...w.cnn.html

[BostonCard]

The title of this thread angers me every time I read it. Are we really so quick to judge others without fully understanding the context of a situation while we observe from our well cushioned seats? Richard Sherman's interview with Rachel Nichols explains it all well.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/...w.cnn.html

I agree Prince.  I wish Sherman would have behaved himself differently in the immediate aftermath of the game, and I in no way condone what he said or did.  But there is a lot of ugliness in this thread; starting with the originating subject line.

BC

[BostonCard]

The title of this thread angers me every time I read it. Are we really so quick to judge others without fully understanding the context of a situation while we observe from our well cushioned seats? Richard Sherman's interview with Rachel Nichols explains it all well.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/...w.cnn.html

I agree Prince.  I wish Sherman would have behaved himself differently in the immediate aftermath of the game, and I in no way condone what he said or did.  But there is a lot of ugliness in this thread; starting with the originating subject line.

BC

[dabigv13]

I think anybody who has grown up in America, certainly anybody who ever played a team sport, has been taught that sports not only build, but also reveal character. We've all by now heard about how Michelle Obama's brother (OSU coach) vetted Barack by playing basketball against him. There's the quote (misattributed to Plato, but I think the widespread usage of it points to its roots in our culture anyway) about how you can learn more about a person in an hour of play than a year of conversation. This code of sportsmanship is what Sherman broke, and has been breaking.

"Class" is an overused concept in sports, but certainly Sherman has made many public comments that are disrespectful at best, going back a long time. I don't see how the thread title is ugly.

Does it really matter if Sherman is or isn't the best cornerback in the league? Don't plenty of other players (who have overcome adversity, who are the best at their position) still find a way to not be an asshole in postgame comments?

Really been rolling my eyes lately about all the opinion pieces about how Sherman is some sort of mirror to see the racism below the surface in America. Yeah, there are a lot of racist people saying dumb bullshit, but criticizing Sherman from the comfort of our couches for being a poor sport is a separate matter.

I like Sherman, and I bet he's a good person, but this is a character flaw of his that I hope he works on. From his later comments, he seems to realize this to an extent.

[dabigv13]

I think anybody who has grown up in America, certainly anybody who ever played a team sport, has been taught that sports not only build, but also reveal character. We've all by now heard about how Michelle Obama's brother (OSU coach) vetted Barack by playing basketball against him. There's the quote (misattributed to Plato, but I think the widespread usage of it points to its roots in our culture anyway) about how you can learn more about a person in an hour of play than a year of conversation. This code of sportsmanship is what Sherman broke, and has been breaking.

"Class" is an overused concept in sports, but certainly Sherman has made many public comments that are disrespectful at best, going back a long time. I don't see how the thread title is ugly.

Does it really matter if Sherman is or isn't the best cornerback in the league? Don't plenty of other players (who have overcome adversity, who are the best at their position) still find a way to not be an asshole in postgame comments?

Really been rolling my eyes lately about all the opinion pieces about how Sherman is some sort of mirror to see the racism below the surface in America. Yeah, there are a lot of racist people saying dumb bullshit, but criticizing Sherman from the comfort of our couches for being a poor sport is a separate matter.

I like Sherman, and I bet he's a good person, but this is a character flaw of his that I hope he works on. From his later comments, he seems to realize this to an extent.

[CJ90]

I don't see how the thread title is ugly.

I like Sherman, and I bet he's a good person . . .

There seem to be a lot of people on this board, and in general, who share roughly the same opinion -- that they like Sherman and think he's a good person, but that his actions on Sunday were inappropriate/bush league/lacking class/classless/[insert your own adjective].  Or said differently, Sherman is a good guy who did a bad thing. 

In that context, "Sherman = classless" might be considered an over-broad indictment of him in general, as a person, as opposed to an indictment of certain actions by him.  I think that's a distinction worth making and perhaps at the core of what the poster above found objectionable in the thread title.  (Or maybe I'm just projecting.)

[CJ90]

I don't see how the thread title is ugly.

I like Sherman, and I bet he's a good person . . .

There seem to be a lot of people on this board, and in general, who share roughly the same opinion -- that they like Sherman and think he's a good person, but that his actions on Sunday were inappropriate/bush league/lacking class/classless/[insert your own adjective].  Or said differently, Sherman is a good guy who did a bad thing. 

In that context, "Sherman = classless" might be considered an over-broad indictment of him in general, as a person, as opposed to an indictment of certain actions by him.  I think that's a distinction worth making and perhaps at the core of what the poster above found objectionable in the thread title.  (Or maybe I'm just projecting.)

[dabigv13]

I certainly get what you're saying, and if the title was Richard Sherman = evil person, or Richard Sherman = worse than the lowest of the low murdering/drunk driving NFL scum, I would agree with you wholeheartedly.

But my point is that Sherman's outburst seems to be symptomatic of a character flaw of his. This isn't a lone incident. Sherman is (probably, I doubt many people on this board have truly had enough personal interaction with him to know) a good guy who did a bad thing, and has done similar bad things often.

And I don't think discussing that is ugly, or racist, or out of bounds.

[dabigv13]

I certainly get what you're saying, and if the title was Richard Sherman = evil person, or Richard Sherman = worse than the lowest of the low murdering/drunk driving NFL scum, I would agree with you wholeheartedly.

But my point is that Sherman's outburst seems to be symptomatic of a character flaw of his. This isn't a lone incident. Sherman is (probably, I doubt many people on this board have truly had enough personal interaction with him to know) a good guy who did a bad thing, and has done similar bad things often.

And I don't think discussing that is ugly, or racist, or out of bounds.

[jacketree]

Richard Sherman's interview = classless

And now Jeff Spicoli will speak on behalf of the Forty Niner organization.

http://youtu.be/n7zfnbdyAW8

[jacketree]

Richard Sherman's interview = classless

And now Jeff Spicoli will speak on behalf of the Forty Niner organization.

http://youtu.be/n7zfnbdyAW8

[Stymie]

Just to clean up some of the very thoughtful replies to my posts on this thread:

1.  I agree that McEnroe was a "great" player, but I put him in 10-20 range rather than in the top ten
2.  Those who disagree with some of my selections might not realize how many great tennis players were forced to play in Kramer's professional circus, and how resultingly, this made the 50's a 60's "Amateur" tennis (i.e. the "grand" slams) an inferior competitive arena.
3.  Regardless, any "greatest" list is just fodder for banter and not a life or death decision.
4.  Vis a vis tennis, I have some history.
5.  Vis a vis current NFL cornerbacks, I have virtually no history (and, to be honest, no pafrticular interest).  What does interest me is how great sportspeople (or even business people, or science people, or any people) can often get greater by telling themsleves publically that they are great.  That's what I see in Sherman and also McEnroe, and also Tiger Woods, fwiw.
6.  Back to tennis, Gonzales (who imho was the greatest (era-adjusted) player I ever saw) thought that Hoad was the only guy he had ever played who really thought he could beat Pancho.

Stymie

[Stymie]

Just to clean up some of the very thoughtful replies to my posts on this thread:

1.  I agree that McEnroe was a "great" player, but I put him in 10-20 range rather than in the top ten
2.  Those who disagree with some of my selections might not realize how many great tennis players were forced to play in Kramer's professional circus, and how resultingly, this made the 50's a 60's "Amateur" tennis (i.e. the "grand" slams) an inferior competitive arena.
3.  Regardless, any "greatest" list is just fodder for banter and not a life or death decision.
4.  Vis a vis tennis, I have some history.
5.  Vis a vis current NFL cornerbacks, I have virtually no history (and, to be honest, no pafrticular interest).  What does interest me is how great sportspeople (or even business people, or science people, or any people) can often get greater by telling themsleves publically that they are great.  That's what I see in Sherman and also McEnroe, and also Tiger Woods, fwiw.
6.  Back to tennis, Gonzales (who imho was the greatest (era-adjusted) player I ever saw) thought that Hoad was the only guy he had ever played who really thought he could beat Pancho.

Stymie

[Redrum]

CNN's Piers Morgan likes Sherman.  Had a cross-promo w another CNN show that will have Sherman on Friday.  But there was a preview shown and Piers jumped in wholeheartedly on Richard's side. 

[Redrum]

CNN's Piers Morgan likes Sherman.  Had a cross-promo w another CNN show that will have Sherman on Friday.  But there was a preview shown and Piers jumped in wholeheartedly on Richard's side.