Overrated sports icons?

Let’s get back on topic for a second.
Personally, I think Tony Hawk is way overrated. While he certainly had his moments of brilliance back in the day, his style of play has been grating on my nerves for quite some time now. Is it possible people just excuse his mediocrity because they find his off-field drama—like this specific situation here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POyFvDgV2cU🤣🤣🤣)—so captivating? Perhaps, but as far as pure talent goes, he hasn't been anything special for a long while.

dustyridge3 said:It might sound silly, but I think a lot of people just don't have the guts to play football.

I actually think the cost of gear is a much bigger hurdle. Plus, football hasn't really exploded globally until recently, once networks in places like Europe started broadcasting games more widely.

btw, if we're talking about overrated players, I gotta say Babe Ruth definitely isn't one.

Adam Moore said:I honestly believe the cost of gear is a much bigger hurdle. Plus, you have to consider that football didn't truly explode on a global scale until just recently, once networks in Europe and elsewhere finally started broadcasting the games.

By the way, if we're discussing athletes who are overrated in their respective sports, I have to step in and say Babe Ruth definitely doesn't belong on that list.

I am repeating myself here, and this is exactly why I joined this discussion in the first place. For God's sake, how can you even attempt to compare a local amateur to Babe Ruth?🤣🤣🤣

dustyridge3 said:Keeping this on topic.
Personally, I think Tony Hawk is overrated too. He was legit back in his prime, but watching him play just grinds my gears lately. Maybe people give him credit because of all those off-field "scandals," like this one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POyFvDgV2cU🤣🤣🤣), but as a player, he hasn't been relevant for ages.

Except for the fact that he led his squad to the conference finals last year at age 40, and statistically—and honestly, skill-wise—he had a top 4 season for a Hall of Fame career. Look, I despise the guy with everything I've got, but he isn't overrated. In my opinion, hardly anyone actually ranks him above Marino, Montana, Tom Brady, Elway, or Manning. And honestly? That's totally fair.

Adam Moore said:aside from the fact that he steered his squad all the way to the conference championship last year at forty years old—and statistically, if not just purely in terms of raw talent, he had a top-four season for a Hall of Fame career—I despise Favre from the bottom of my soul, yet the guy isn't overrated. I think perhaps a handful of people actually rank him ahead of Marino, Montana, Tom Brady, Elway, and Manning. And honestly? If they want to do that, fine.

Well, it’s precisely because of those rare outliers that I included him on the list. I stated that he was a fantastic player, but in my estimation, he simply doesn't measure up against the names I mentioned, despite what some people might claim.

Noah Ross7 said:King is out here comparing a blacksmith to Babe Ruth. Unbelievable... 🙏

lol, you see this guy... comparing some random benchwarmer to my man Babe... unbelievable...☕
Which clubs are you guys actually talking about? I've said it before: staying within our own frameworks—or even following the rules of nations that don't obsess over some other athlete's name—matters more than the name of Babe Ruth... unless, of course, you're all just obsessed with everything North American. If that's the case, just stick to your own jokes and leave it at that...
Why is this so hard to grasp...
Any sane person knows you can't put a bocce player and Babe Ruth in the same breath... it was just a damn parable...
I’m convinced more people around here know Ty Cobb than Babe Ruth... probably because they actually saw the movie about Cobb. It all comes back to what Scipio said—it’s just pure marketing...
Japanese, local Latinos, and the guys from Philly... they all smoke anything with an American label. It's pretty obvious...☕
Look, not knowing the players from the turn of the century in a country like America where nobody cares about baseball isn't exactly a sign of being uncultured...

shadowridge14 said:LOL, can you believe this guy actually has the nerve to compare some local bocce player to my man Babe?☕
What kind of absolute clowns are you people, honestly? I’ve stated multiple times that within our own cultural context—or even when looking at nations that don't obsess over a specific sport—local legends carry more weight than Babe Ruth ever could! Unless, of course, you're one of those mindless North American fanatics who just swallow every bit of hype they're fed.
Why is that so incredibly difficult for any of you to grasp??????????????????????????????????????
Any sane individual understands that comparing a bocce player to Ruth in the same breath is an absurdity; it was clearly meant as a metaphor!!!
Furthermore, I am convinced that more people around here know who Ty Cobb is than Babe Ruth, simply because of the movie Cobb, which brings us right back to the point Scipio made regarding the sheer power of marketing!
Between the Japanese, the nearby Latinos, and the folks in Philly, everyone seems to worship anything with an American label, which should be obvious by now. ☕
So, let me make this clear: not knowing players from the early 20th century in a country like America, where baseball isn't the primary obsession, is not some sign of being uncultured!!!!!!!

Look, I'm not some North American fanatic myself, but why on earth would you claim baseball is strictly an American sport?

Adam Moore said:Beyond the fact that he led his squad to the Conference Championship at age 40—and statistically, if not purely in skill, had a top-four year for a Hall of Fame career—I honestly can't stand Favre. But the guy isn't overrated. I think you'll rarely see him ranked above Marino, Montana, Tom Brady, Elway, or Manning. And honestly, that’s fair.

Is Brady really that great of a QB?

I don't know. He seems fine to me. My take is that he stepped into a perfectly tuned organization and had an offensive line that let him sit comfortably in the pocket for five seconds without being harassed.

dustyridge3 said:I'm no patriot, but what makes baseball strictly an American sport?

No, it's Slovakian...🙄
Misunderstanding things again. Are you actually reading the previous posts? It’s definitely not a global sport, but I never said it was strictly American (we even mentioned a few places where it has some decent popularity)...

On topic: I think Cristiano Ronaldo is a great player, but he's slightly overrated because the marketing machine and all that money tied to his name means they won't leave a single cent on the table. (It wouldn't be fair to compare him to Beckham since the guy is much more complete)...

Raymond Anderson4 said:Is Tom Brady really that great of a QB?

I don't know, man. He seems alright to me. I think he just landed in a system that runs like a well-oiled machine, plus he’s got an offensive line that lets him sit in the pocket comfortably for at least five seconds.

Tom Brady has three rings, and before Randy Moss showed up, he didn't even have a decent WR. That first title was a total shocker, too. I'm not sure if you caught his games before his injury, but what made him elite was his ability to hold steady in the pocket and zip the ball away right before getting leveled. Since the injury, he's definitely been more impatient, though staying away from interceptions this season has been 🙏 🙏 🙏 impressive, regardless of the OL. And let's be real, the Patriots didn't have the best offensive line in the league this year.

In my opinion, Wilt Chamberlain is a massive overhyped legend. The guy’s stats are insane—he dominated the league like nobody else ever has—but he played on powerhouse teams and still only walked away with two rings, while Bill Russell was racking up 11 during that same era. To me, it's the ultimate proof that basketball stats are a pretty lousy way to measure true greatness; they might give you a general idea, but they aren't the gold standard for how good a player actually is.

Honestly, Hollywood movies about growing up as some kid from a tough Italian or Polish neighborhood in Brooklyn have done more for Babe Ruth's legacy than the actual game of baseball ever did. You clearly don't know anything about sports.

If they actually banned hot dogs and stopped letting people tailgate or act rowdy at the stadium, half the crowd would end up in jail before the seventh inning, and the rest would just head home out of sheer boredom.

frozentiger6 said:Hollywood movies have done more to make Babe Ruth a legend (you know, those classic stories about growing up Italian or Polish in Brooklyn) than the actual game of baseball ever did. You clearly don't get sports.

If they banned hot dogs and all that general gluttony at the stadium, half the fans would be throwing punches mid-inning while the rest would just head home out of pure boredom.

I’m inclined to agree here. Honestly, if it weren't for the movies, I wouldn't have the slightest clue who Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, or Mickey Mantle even were. Even Ty Cobb—who doesn't get nearly enough screen time elsewhere—has his own movie to keep him relevant.😁

shadowridge14 said:haha, man, you guys are unbelievable... seriously, comparing some random handball player to my man Babe? yo, dude...☕
you guys are such losers on this forum. I’ve said it a bunch of times already—within OUR context, or even the context of other countries where they don't obsess over whatever niche sport you're talking about, those names actually carry more weight than Babe Ruth!!!! unless, of course, you're all just obsessed with everything North American, in which case, just keep riding those waves and acting like a total fanboy.

Well, obviously it's not that big a deal here because we just don't care about those sports.
It's the same thing with most of the world—they have no clue what handball or water polo even is, or maybe those sports are just amateur level there; I mean, just look at the Australian national teams.🤣
Even rugby isn't really a thing here, nobody knows anything about it except for a few die-hards, but globally speaking, it's way more widespread and massive compared to something like handball.

Adam Moore said:By the way, if we're going to sit here and debate which athletes have been overrated throughout history, I feel compelled to point out that Babe Ruth certainly doesn't belong on that list.

Just thinking off the top of my head, one name from the NBA immediately comes to mind when discussing overhyped players... Allen Iverson.

Adam Moore said:I guess you can only say things like this if you’ve never actually picked up a bat and tried to hit a ball. I don't know if there's any other sport that demands such intense hand-eye coordination, incredible speed, and agility. In baseball, you have about 0.3 seconds to judge where a tennis-ball-sized projectile is going to end up, swing, and make contact. If you haven't tried it, you probably don't realize how tough it is—not to mention having to overcome the fear of a rock-hard object flying at you at over 90 mph.

Even though people sometimes think players are out of shape (though, honestly, Babe Ruth was incredibly mobile for a bigger guy and quite muscular, which shows in his stats), baseball is an extremely demanding game, both physically and mentally. I suspect most people on this forum could probably sink an NBA three-pointer out of 100 tries or score a penalty against a top-tier goalie, but I doubt many could hit a single against an average MLB pitcher.

It's a bit frustrating when certain sports get dismissed for all sorts of reasons, especially since there isn't a single sport where you can reach the top without massive amounts of talent and hard work. As for Babe Ruth's place in baseball history, the only real criticism is that he didn't play against Black or Hispanic players, but even taking that into account, the guy is easily one of the top three players to ever play the game.

Since you know me, you know I don't look down on any sport, but I just wrote exactly what I felt. On a global scale, Babe Ruth isn't really a major figure in sports history, but in America, he definitely is. Most of us only know him because he gets mentioned in movies and TV shows. If I had to rank American stars by importance (whatever that metric might be), I'd say the names I listed earlier are much bigger than Ruth. Not all sports are equal, and it's hard to compare someone like Phelps to Babe. Baseball, like many other sports, doesn't have the same physical demands as swimming or cycling, and then there's the time zone difference to consider. That applies to more than just baseball, either; it's no secret that other sports don't play 162 regular-season games a year. American football is certainly more physically demanding than baseball. Sports vary from being purely about strength, speed, and endurance to those focused on intelligence and skill. So, while Ruth isn't overrated within baseball because he truly is one of the best ever, I struggle to see him held in that same high regard in the context of world sports as Americans do. I'm not really interested in the whole "baseball is silly according to Americans, handball is silly according to Americans" kind of relativism. Every sport has its fans, participants, and spectators, and popularity depends on a lot of different factors.

darkjackal70 said:Off the top of my head, the only one who comes to mind right now is an NBA legend... Allen Iverson...

But he isn't even in the NBA anymore, he's hanging out in Istanbul these days, isn't he?

Daniel Booth37 said:You know me—I’m not one to trash any sport, but I meant exactly what I said. On a global scale, Babe Ruth isn't really a massive figure in sports history, but here in the States? He’s a legend.

Yeah, it’s mostly just because MLB is so huge, but that doesn't actually mean anything when you're talking about pure athletic achievement. Honestly, I find those debates between fans of different athletes totally absurd—like people arguing over who's "greater" based on which sport has more competition. You can't use how popular a sport is as an objective way to compare two elite athletes from different disciplines. To me, reaching the top in discus, MLB, football, or even curling is equally impressive. I really don't get why people try to use "global impact" as a metric for greatness.

Daniel Booth37 said:I mean, MLB (just like a lot of other sports) isn't exactly an endurance test like swimming or cycling, right? Plus, you've got to factor in the jet lag. That goes for way more than just baseball, though—it applies to plenty of other team and individual sports too.

I don't really get why people think how much cardio an athlete puts in is the only way to measure their value in a sport.
When it comes to the time gap between eras, I’ve gotta say that MLB is one of those sports where the timeline hasn't actually changed much. Once you strip away the "deadball era" quirks, you can easily stack up Ruth's stats against guys playing today or even fifty years from now. The only real headache for analysts right now is this whole steroid era, which definitely pumped up some numbers way more than they should have been.

Daniel Booth37 said:I mean, it’s no secret that other sports don't grind through a 162-game regular season. Football is definitely more physically punishing than MLB. Sports just vary—some are all about raw power, speed, and endurance, while others are more about IQ and pure skill.

So, what’s the deal with saying physical sports are somehow more valuable than ones driven by coordination, skill, and IQ? Are we really claiming that athletes who just "push the limits of human biology" have contributed more to sports than those who don't? If that's the logic, we might as well write off MLB as a relevant sport. If you look at the top 20 players in history, you won't find many pure specimens who redefined human physical limits in some other field. Baseball is a game where tactical intelligence, hand-eye coordination, and sheer skill are just as vital—if not more so—than raw speed, power, or stamina.

btw MLB isn't exactly explosive, high-octane, or aerobic (even if you're absolutely gassed trying to track down fly balls in the outfield 😉), but the main reason they can grind out such a massive schedule is because it's not a contact sport. It’s kind of like tennis, where the top pros end up playing over 100 matches a season.

Daniel Booth37 said:so, when we're talking about MLB, Ruth doesn't get an oversized reputation since he's definitely one of the greatest to ever do it. But if we're looking at the entire global sporting landscape, I find it hard to see it ranked as high as Americans tend to put it. That said, I'm not really interested in that whole "Americans think soccer is trash, while others think football is trash" type of relativism. Every sport has its own dedicated fans and players, and how widespread it gets just depends on a ton of different factors.

personally, I don't think relativizing by putting athletes on some sort of global scale makes much sense. We can talk about their importance within their own specific sports based purely on stats and results, but when you move to that global scale, you have to factor in popularity, tradition, and reach—things that don't actually have much to do with the sport itself.

MLB is an American pastime, but on the global stage? It’s basically irrelevant 🙂

If it weren't for Hollywood making movies about it, nobody would even know who some old lady Ruth 🤷 was—just some totally insignificant figure from outside the USA, much like the sport she was tied to 🙂

🙂

Adam Moore said:...

Honestly, this was such a well-written piece.