Originally Posted by Atwater His Ass
Regardless, eventhough a SB win is a team accomplishment, you also need good players to get it done (hi 80s Bronocs). While you can't attribute the entire victory to a single player, you can't take away the whole of the accomplishment from them either.
Some players mean more to their teams than just the stats or with their leadership. In Sharpe's case, he's the even rarer player that can do both. Although Baltimore rode their defense to their SB win, it's not merely a coinecednce that Sharpe was a part of leading that team to victory, something that Gonzalez just can't do even when he had talent around him.
Bottom line is chief fans want to just look at things that put gonzo in a better light than Sharpe will ignoring the opposite. I mean, winning SB's is the be all end all in this sport. It's why they play. So saying that a player that has won 3 but it has to be thrown out in an argument only because it doesn't help your side of the case, is just ludricus. It's the mantra of the perennial loser and it gets old.
We can all agree that Sharpe and gonzo are two of the all time greats at the position and we've been lucky to see them play. However, history remembers winners, and as such, Sharpe will always go down at the better of the two in every region of the world outside of Kansas City. This is why it's too bad for gonzo that he never got out of KC while he could.
So you're saying that Joe Montana was at least 2X as good as John Elway? That's an interesting perspective for sure.
In my opinion, those that use a SB as the only arguement for a player being better than another is for those that lack real ammunition to be able to evaluate a player based on personal production.
Thanks for the exchange. It was a delight.