You have to win a championship to be considered the goat?

[longliveCS40]

This is the DUMBEST argument in all of team sports. It boggles my mind that so many people think you need to win a championship to be the greatest player ever at your team sport.

So if Caitlin Clark would have committed to South Carolina instead of Iowa, she's all of a sudden the goat but since she chose to play with 3 star recruits instead of a team of 5 stars, she somehow isn't the goat? That makes her MORE of the goat in my opinion.

Individual sports, by all means, measure people by championships. It means nothing in team sports when discussing the best to ever play.

 

[BirdistheWord]

This is the DUMBEST argument in all of team sports. It boggles my mind that so many people think you need to win a championship to be the greatest player ever at your team sport.

So if Caitlin Clark would have committed to South Carolina instead of Iowa, she's all of a sudden the goat but since she chose to play with 3 star recruits instead of a team of 5 stars, she somehow isn't the goat? That makes her MORE of the goat in my opinion.

Individual sports, by all means, measure people by championships. It means nothing in team sports when discussing the best to ever play.

I wouldn’t say it means nothing. But context matters -The way I would frame it (you were onto this point) is that she took a good program (not great) to new heights. Final fours, champ games, etc. she elevated 3 star talent to go toe to toe with 5 star schools like South Carolina, LSU, UConn, etc.

Much harder than being part of a dream team.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

I totally agree. There is an Athletic article from a week or two ago where they ask a bunch of coaches/players if they consider Caitlin to be the GOAT. A few said yes, but quite a few others said no because of no championships and they listed some UConn players as their GOAT for that reason.

It just boggles my mind they can’t see that taking Iowa to the championship game is a greater accomplishment than winning a title with UConn.

If UConn had recruited her, does anyone not think she would have at least one title and more likely more than one?!?

 

[MeetTheFerentzes]

Fair or not, individual athletes are judged partially by their ability to win championships in their team's sport. I wouldn't call it the dumbest argument, because if it's a team sport, then team accomplishments are what matter, so there's nothing wrong with factoring in an individual's inability to lead a team to that goal.

Jordan didn't win a championship until his 7th season; Elway didn't win one until his 15th. Both of them were considered GOAT candidates prior to their championships, but were judged differently after their first championship. There is no right or wrong answer; it's just a topic of discussion.

I consider Barry Sanders and Gale Sayers to be the top 2 RB's of all time, and they have 0 championships between them, college and NFL.

 

[longliveCS40]

Fair or not, individual athletes are judged partially by their ability to win championships in their team's sport. I wouldn't call it the dumbest argument, because if it's a team sport, then team accomplishments are what matter, so there's nothing wrong with factoring in an individual's inability to lead a team to that goal.

Jordan didn't win a championship until his 7th season; Elway didn't win one until his 15th. Both of them were considered GOAT candidates prior to their championships, but were judged differently after their first championship. There is no right or wrong answer; it's just a topic of discussion.

I consider Barry Sanders and Gale Sayers to be the top 2 RB's of all time, and they have 0 championships between them, college and NFL.

The last paragraph is the point. Sanders and Sayers didn't have good enough supporting cast to win championships. So you're telling me the failures of a front office determine if a player is the goat or not?

If Jordan plays on the Raptors his whole career he has 0 championships. He would still be the goat.

 

[BirdistheWord]

The last paragraph is the point. Sanders and Sayers didn't have good enough supporting cast to win championships. So you're telling me the failures of a front office determine if a player is the goat or not?

If Jordan plays on the Raptors his whole career he has 0 championships. He would still be the goat.

We will never know but MJ did not build a dream team. He had Scottie Pippen and guys like Grant, Rodman, Paxton, BJ, etc. certainly good talent but Bill Wennington, Luke Longley, Bill Cartwright, Ron Harper and Scott Williams were hardly elite players.

 

[jaxhawk06]

I agree with Nick Wright here. I also think it's stupid how when others debate this, they always bring up pros and fail to mention that you only have 4 years in college.

 

[Andrew Houk]

I look at it like this, did Jordan suddenly become a better player in year #7 (the year he finally won a championship)? No! Of course not. In year #3, he averaged 37 ppg and in year #4, he averaged 35 ppg on 54% shooting! If anything his absolute best years were in the 80s, prior to him winning a championship. The fact that Jordan's best years didn't even come in years where he won a championship tells you all you need to know about the validity of championships as the metric for individual players in a team sport.

 

[longliveCS40]

We will never know but MJ did not build a dream team. He had Scottie Pippen and guys like Grant, Rodman, Paxton, BJ, etc. certainly good talent but Bill Wennington, Luke Longley, Bill Cartwright, Ron Harper and Scott Williams were hardly elite players.

Scottie Pippin might well have been the second best player in the league during that time. That's the recipe in the NBA. Two superstars and some good role players.

 

[luvmyhawks]

None of this matters as Iowa and Caitlin will be wearing a ring very soon.

 

[eyesofhawk]

You have to be the greatest player of all time to be considered the GOAT. CC is not the greatest player in the world today. So how is she the greatest of all-time?

Stop wrecklesslly throwing around a term that is meant for the most selective of usage. There are a lot of WNBA players taking offense to everyone calling CC the GOAT, and they're going to try to make her life hell for it. It could even backfire Friday. Teams like UCONN, coaches like Auriemma, and players like Bueckers don't need extra motivation to be scary. You can bet all of the GOAT crowning for CC will have UCONN at peak motivation.

If you only mean that CC is the GOAT of women's college basketball, then make that distinction and call her the college GOAT. Because this isn't implied when calling someone the greatest player of all time.

There are certainly other candidates for the college GOAT. And most of them have at least one championship. And those championships give them a strong foothold in the GOAT conversation. It's not so much that CC doesn't have a title, but moreso that some of the other greats do have one or more titles, and those titles can never be diminished.

Basketball is a team sport. The number one objective for any player is that their team wins a championship. At this point CC has no championship. So is she being crowned the GOAT based on stats alone? Yes, it's more impressive for CC to have gotten Iowa to two straight final fours, than it would have been if she had done the same thing playing for UCONN. But her stats wouldn't have been as impressive if she had played for UCONN or any team in which her teammates were more talented. Likewise, the greats that have won championships for teams like UCONN would have had stats closer to CC's had they played on lesser teams.

Also, CC is considered greater than she would have been by having taken her team to two straight final fours. Would people be calling her the GOAT if she played on a losing team? I doubt it. Team success does matter when evaluating an individual's level of greatness.

In the end, what's silly is the over individualization that's occurring in team sports. In a team sport it really doesn't matter who the greatest player of all time is. Would CC rather win a championship or be called the GOAT? I can guarantee you what happens to be the answer to that question.

All that being said, Iowa is making a hell of a run, and CC's greatness is undeniable. Although not a perfect team, Iowa's greatness is also undeniable, and it just may be good enough to win the whole thing. Hopefully they continue to play their best ball

 

[Tenacious E]

Teams like UCONN, coaches like Auriemma, and players like Bueckers don't need extra motivation to be scary. You can bet all of the GOAT crowning for CC will have UCONN at peak motivation.

True, but everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. No denying UConn’s historical prowess and coaching ability, but this is not vintage UConn given their injuries. Over the course if 40 minutes, I see Clark overwhelming UConn.

 

[ichawk24]

Winning does matter. But I agree that context matters.

CC took the Iowa program to heights it has never seen. Back to back Final Fours. Three straight Big Ten tourney titles. With a roster full of three stars.

The UConn girls are part of a dynasty with 23 Final Fours. How can you judge any individual UConn girl as a great winner? They are part of the machine. Bueckers missed all of last season yet UConn still went 31-7 and 16-2 in conference. If CC missed a full season at Iowa we would go .500 in conference play.

 

[hawkcub]

The people who make that argument never take into account she did this at Iowa. The players they put up there against her with championships played on blue bloods that had 5 stars on the bench. Let's also not forget the talent level in the women's game has gotten better.

 

[nck24]

This is the DUMBEST argument in all of team sports. It boggles my mind that so many people think you need to win a championship to be the greatest player ever at your team sport.

So if Caitlin Clark would have committed to South Carolina instead of Iowa, she's all of a sudden the goat but since she chose to play with 3 star recruits instead of a team of 5 stars, she somehow isn't the goat? That makes her MORE of the goat in my opinion.

Individual sports, by all means, measure people by championships. It means nothing in team sports when discussing the best to ever play.

It's just another layer of "qualifiers" intended to minimalize CC's accomplishments. The haters will create another on once CC wins a championship.

 

[QChawks]

I kinda agree

To be in consideration for goat status you need to have made others around you better. Just putting up big stats isn’t enough for me.

However, playing on a bad team isn’t fully in that individual players control. That’s on the head coach, there are injuries, transfers…

Now I could argue that CC has already done enough, her assists records, 3 straight BTT, back to back FF’s. I don’t think it’s championship or bust but you have had to have played on a high level team.

 

[hawkod]

This is the DUMBEST argument in all of team sports. It boggles my mind that so many people think you need to win a championship to be the greatest player ever at your team sport.

So if Caitlin Clark would have committed to South Carolina instead of Iowa, she's all of a sudden the goat but since she chose to play with 3 star recruits instead of a team of 5 stars, she somehow isn't the goat? That makes her MORE of the goat in my opinion.

Individual sports, by all means, measure people by championships. It means nothing in team sports when discussing the best to ever play.

And amongst team sports, there's different levels of difficulty in winning championships. Tom Brady won a bunch of Super Bowls, but what was his competition: 31 other teams. NCAA basketball you're competing with 10 times that amount. How many years did Brady play? Over 15 I'm sure. Caitlin gets 4 chances.

Completely apples vs oranges.

 

[blubberhawk]

The last paragraph is the point. Sanders and Sayers didn't have good enough supporting cast to win championships. So you're telling me the failures of a front office determine if a player is the goat or not?

If Jordan plays on the Raptors his whole career he has 0 championships. He would still be the

You have to be the greatest player of all time to be considered the GOAT. CC is not the greatest player in the world today. So how is she the greatest of all-time?

Stop wrecklesslly throwing around a term that is meant for the most selective of usage. There are a lot of WNBA players taking offense to everyone calling CC the GOAT, and they're going to try to make her life hell for it. It could even backfire Friday. Teams like UCONN, coaches like Auriemma, and players like Bueckers don't need extra motivation to be scary. You can bet all of the GOAT crowning for CC will have UCONN at peak motivation.

If you only mean that CC is the GOAT of women's college basketball, then make that distinction and call her the college GOAT. Because this isn't implied when calling someone the greatest player of all time.

There are certainly other candidates for the college GOAT. And most of them have at least one championship. And those championships give them a strong foothold in the GOAT conversation. It's not so much that CC doesn't have a title, but moreso that some of the other greats do have one or more titles, and those titles can never be diminished.

Basketball is a team sport. The number one objective for any player is that their team wins a championship. At this point CC has no championship. So is she being crowned the GOAT based on stats alone? Yes, it's more impressive for CC to have gotten Iowa to two straight final fours, than it would have been if she had done the same thing playing for UCONN. But her stats wouldn't have been as impressive if she had played for UCONN or any team in which her teammates were more talented. Likewise, the greats that have won championships for teams like UCONN would have had stats closer to CC's had they played on lesser teams.

Also, CC is considered greater than she would have been by having taken her team to two straight final fours. Would people be calling her the GOAT if she played on a losing team? I doubt it. Team success does matter when evaluating an individual's level of greatness.

In the end, what's silly is the over individualization that's occurring in team sports. In a team sport it really doesn't matter who the greatest player of all time is. Would CC rather win a championship or be called the GOAT? I can guarantee you what happens to be the answer to that question.

All that being said, Iowa is making a hell of a run, and CC's greatness is undeniable. Although not a perfect team, Iowa's greatness is also undeniable, and it just may be good enough to win the whole thing. Hopefully they continue to play their best ball

She has been facing the GOAT conversation very well all season and EVERY TEAM has used it in their game preparation. And the fact that message board contributors talk about it is irrelevant when every sports outlet, podcast, etc. bring it up all the time. CC doesn't bring it up. Bluder doesn't bring it up. The big mouth, know it alls have to have something to blather about and make themselves relevant.

 

[Willin]

Scottie Pippin might well have been the second best player in the league during that time. That's the recipe in the NBA. Two superstars and some good role players.

And a great coach (Jackson is a HOF coach. Not every player has that benefit.

 

[hoffmkr]

Here is the thing, to be THE GOAT, that means top overall EVER.
Taking Iowa to Final 4 is equal to winning 1 championship at UCON or Tenn back in the day.
However, some of people in conversation have 3+ titles.
To be the CLEAR winner, something more is needed.
Right now, CC is having the conversation, but hopefully by Sunday, she has the Crown.

 

[BirdistheWord]

I look at it like this, did Jordan suddenly become a better player in year #7 (the year he finally won a championship)? No! Of course not. In year #3, he averaged 37 ppg and in year #4, he averaged 35 ppg on 54% shooting! If anything his absolute best years were in the 80s, prior to him winning a championship. The fact that Jordan's best years didn't even come in years where he won a championship tells you all you need to know about the validity of championships as the metric for individual players in a team sport.

There are a number of factors but it should not be just about stats. Carmelo had great scoring stats but never really elevated the “team”

 

[HemiHawk]

This is the DUMBEST argument in all of team sports. It boggles my mind that so many people think you need to win a championship to be the greatest player ever at your team sport.

So if Caitlin Clark would have committed to South Carolina instead of Iowa, she's all of a sudden the goat but since she chose to play with 3 star recruits instead of a team of 5 stars, she somehow isn't the goat? That makes her MORE of the goat in my opinion.

Individual sports, by all means, measure people by championships. It means nothing in team sports when discussing the best to ever play.

Feurebach, Stuelke, Gyamfi, McCabe, Jones, Ediger, OGrady, Affolter and Warnock are all 4 star top 100 recruits. Marshall (#28 PG), Martin (#28 guard), Goodman (#12 post), and Cizano (#17 post) are 3 star, Davis is three time all MAC.

The next 6 recruits coming in are one 5 star and four 4 star, all top 100 recruits. There is more talent on this team than people give them credit for.

Recruiting rankings courtesy of HoopGurlz and Prospect Nation.

I agree Clark is still the GOAT regardless.

 

[TampaHawkfan]

I look at it like this, did Jordan suddenly become a better player in year #7 (the year he finally won a championship)? No! Of course not. In year #3, he averaged 37 ppg and in year #4, he averaged 35 ppg on 54% shooting! If anything his absolute best years were in the 80s, prior to him winning a championship. The fact that Jordan's best years didn't even come in years where he won a championship tells you all you need to know about the validity of championships as the metric for individual players in a team sport.

Exactly. One player can't win a championship all by themselves. Gotta have that supporting cast, too. Winning championships is a team effort.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

Some girls that sat on the bench at UConn for 4-5 years could have 4 rings.

IMO winning championships is only a “must” for NFL QB’s.

 

[hoffmkr]

I’m talking vs Brianna Stewart
4x championship
3x player of the year

Vs Chamique Holdsclaw
3x champion
2x player of year

Vs Diana Taurasi
3x champion
2x player of year

Vs Cheryl Miller
2x champion
3x player of the year


These are the only other ones in my discussion

 

[intrepodor]

I wouldn’t say it means nothing. But context matters -The way I would frame it (you were onto this point) is that she took a good program (not great) to new heights. Final fours, champ games, etc. she elevated 3 star talent to go toe to toe with 5 star schools like South Carolina, LSU, UConn, etc.

Much harder than being part of a dream team.

Exactly. She wouldn't have had the numbers she had playing for any other coach.
Bluder pur her in a position to excel.

 

[ozzie8]

So stupid. I keep hearing Taurasi because she has 3 titles with 3 different groups at UConn. Those 3 different groups were also the elite of the elite players/talent wise. You better ****ing win titles with that talent in women’s basketball!

 

[longliveCS40]

Feurebach, Stuelke, Gyamfi, McCabe, Jones, Ediger, OGrady, Affolter and Warnock are all 4 star top 100 recruits. Marshall (#28 PG), Martin (#28 guard), Goodman (#12 post), and Cizano (#17 post) are 3 star, Davis is three time all MAC.

Certainly not trying to minimize the accomplishments or the talent of CC's supporting cast. They've played very well. However, without CC, this team is nowhere near a Final Four caliber team.

For contrast, and to give the prime example for my argument, here is South Carolina's roster and their recruiting grades. All 5 stars except one player.

South Carolina:
Kamilla Cardosa: 5 star
Bree Hall: 5 star
Ashlyn Watkins: 5 star
Chloe Kitts: 5 star
Te-Hina Paopao: 5 star
Raven Johnson: 5 star
Sania Feagin: 5 star
Milaysia Fulwiley: 5 star
Tessa Johnson: 4 star

Edit: and for the record, I'm anointing CC the GOAT of Women's College Basketball. She hasn't played in the WNBA yet so that's a conversation for the future.

 

[Cymonhawk]

I'm at the age now where I really don't care what the rest of the world thinks. I've followed Clark and seen enough of her games and what she does on the court to make up my own mind. She is the GOAT hands down. There should be no argument.

 

[millah_22]

This is the DUMBEST argument in all of team sports. It boggles my mind that so many people think you need to win a championship to be the greatest player ever at your team sport.

So if Caitlin Clark would have committed to South Carolina instead of Iowa, she's all of a sudden the goat but since she chose to play with 3 star recruits instead of a team of 5 stars, she somehow isn't the goat? That makes her MORE of the goat in my opinion.

Individual sports, by all means, measure people by championships. It means nothing in team sports when discussing the best to ever play.

it's a shitty gatekeeping talking point. Always move the goalposts.

Having a natty would be huge, but how many players have led their teams to back-to-back final fours? That is also huge.

 

[EagleHawk]

I’m talking vs Brianna Stewart
4x championship
3x player of the year

Vs Chamique Holdsclaw
3x champion
2x player of year

Vs Diana Taurasi
3x champion
2x player of year

Vs Cheryl Miller
2x champion
3x player of the year


These are the only other ones in my discussion

Kiah Stokes has 3 NCAA titles and two WNBA titles. where does she rank on the GOAT scale? Gotta be top 10 if not top 5.

 

[83Hawk]

If it's all about rings, why isn't Jim Loscutoff considered to be better than Jordan? He has 7 to Jordans 6. Why isn't Bill Russell the greatest player of all time? He has 11.

Requiring a championship to be considered the best ever in a team sport is indeed, one of the dumbest arguments ever.

 

[83Hawk]

Some girls that sat on the bench at UConn for 4-5 years could have 4 rings.

IMO winning championships is only a “must” for NFL QB’s.

Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson.....

Bart Starr won 5 NFL championships, yet he is NEVER mentioned as even in the Top 5 QB's of all time.

 

[Slim45]

You have to be the greatest player of all time to be considered the GOAT. CC is not the greatest player in the world today. So how is she the greatest of all-time?

Stop wrecklesslly throwing around a term that is meant for the most selective of usage. There are a lot of WNBA players taking offense to everyone calling CC the GOAT, and they're going to try to make her life hell for it. It could even backfire Friday. Teams like UCONN, coaches like Auriemma, and players like Bueckers don't need extra motivation to be scary. You can bet all of the GOAT crowning for CC will have UCONN at peak motivation.

If you only mean that CC is the GOAT of women's college basketball, then make that distinction and call her the college GOAT. Because this isn't implied when calling someone the greatest player of all time.

There are certainly other candidates for the college GOAT. And most of them have at least one championship. And those championships give them a strong foothold in the GOAT conversation. It's not so much that CC doesn't have a title, but moreso that some of the other greats do have one or more titles, and those titles can never be diminished.

Basketball is a team sport. The number one objective for any player is that their team wins a championship. At this point CC has no championship. So is she being crowned the GOAT based on stats alone? Yes, it's more impressive for CC to have gotten Iowa to two straight final fours, than it would have been if she had done the same thing playing for UCONN. But her stats wouldn't have been as impressive if she had played for UCONN or any team in which her teammates were more talented. Likewise, the greats that have won championships for teams like UCONN would have had stats closer to CC's had they played on lesser teams.

Also, CC is considered greater than she would have been by having taken her team to two straight final fours. Would people be calling her the GOAT if she played on a losing team? I doubt it. Team success does matter when evaluating an individual's level of greatness.

In the end, what's silly is the over individualization that's occurring in team sports. In a team sport it really doesn't matter who the greatest player of all time is. Would CC rather win a championship or be called the GOAT? I can guarantee you what happens to be the answer to that question.

All that being said, Iowa is making a hell of a run, and CC's greatness is undeniable. Although not a perfect team, Iowa's greatness is also undeniable, and it just may be good enough to win the whole thing. Hopefully they continue to play their best ball

Pretty sure when people are calling her the GOAT, it’s of women’s basketball. Not basketball in general. And she is! What she’s accomplished team wise at a school like Iowa, which isn’t known as a women’s basketball powerhouse, is pretty crazy. And she’s broken basically every record individually that there was to break. Her combination of skills is something that hasn’t been seen in the women’s game, and that includes the wnba. That’s why she gets the amount of attention she does, because what she’s doing has never been seen before in the women’s game.

 

[hoffmkr]

Kiah Stokes has 3 NCAA titles and two WNBA titles. where does she rank on the GOAT scale? Gotta be top 10 if not top 5.

She won zero NCAA player of the year. If you aren’t best player in country while winning title, the title does not get you in the conversation.

There are 8 multi-year Wcbb players of the year. Those are the starting point to discuss GOAT.

 

[BioHawk]

This is just another move the goalposts claim. Just like some of them have moved the goalposts again to winning "multiple championships". Because you only get 4 or 5 years in college to do that.

I get it. Players from the last 30 years are upset/jealous that they never got the recognition that these college players are getting. They want credit for building the league and getting the sport to where it is. And they deserve that. The thing is though, they don't deserve it in place of the current generation of players. Caitlin Clark doesn't exist because they played, Caitlin Clark got to be this good because she was born with an unusually strong competitive nature and she worked her ass off to get that good. She has an opportunity to play at this level because of the work the players before her put in. That should be appreciated, but nobody should have to talk about how great Lobo or Swoopes were every time they want to talk about Beuckers, Clark, or Reese.

 

[hoffmkr]

You are talking about Greatest of ALL TIME.
Every year, more people play so the standard to be 1 of 1 is going to get tougher.
That doesn’t stop current players from being great, but does factor in being GREATEST.
Swoopes and Lobo are not in the conversation.
However, if 2 years ago, you had the conversation, you would have had to split hairs to get an answer and very little agreement.
CC has elevated to the point that on Sunday night, she could be THE answer.

 

[ShonnDeereGreene]

I agree with Nick Wright here. I also think it's stupid how when others debate this, they always bring up pros and fail to mention that you only have 4 years in college.

View embedded media

This. AND pros are built to establish some level of parity so that everyone at least has an opportunity to start from a somewhat (not totally) level playing field. The framework and guardrails are there at least, so winning a championship in the pros is at least a little more reasonable to consider in the pros.

None of that exists in college. As mentioned, CC taking a program to new and extraordinary heights is more impressive than maintaining the standard - surrounded by other 5-star talent - at UConn, for example.

 

[Fan In Black]

the GOAT because of championships in a team sport was dumb before Clark and will be dumb after Clark.

 

[WSC72]

If it's all about rings, why isn't Jim Loscutoff considered to be better than Jordan? He has 7 to Jordans 6. Why isn't Bill Russell the greatest player of all time? He has 11.

Requiring a championship to be considered the best ever in a team sport is indeed, one of the dumbest arguments ever.

Personally I think Bill Russell is the GOAT. Of course I’m old. But his 13 Championships, including college, and as a player coach certainly give him at least a chair at the table.

In my mind you do have to win a title (are there any GOATS that never won a title in the main US sports? I honestly don’t know) But it’s all a matter of opinion I suppose