Rings of course matter and should, but do people go over zealous about how rings a player has. Tom Brady fans will always say he’s the Goat and the first reason is the rinds. We’re not debating who the goat is, but the ring argument.
We’ve all had those conversations, and it might end like this. “He can’t be the goat he doesn’t have the rings like Brady”. Is that fair and how we should judge people during their career?
Other Players
If we ask who the greatest all time tight end is, most of us would say Tony Gonzelazs. For good reason, he racked up yards and touchdowns like a wide receiver and was dominant for his era. However he has no championships.
A guy has the stats, but not the rings. On the other hand Shannon Sharpe has 3 rings, so does that make him a better player? For quarterbacks it seems to be that way. For example Dan Marino had better stats then Joe Montana, so he’s a better quarterback right?
Most likely you got irritated by me just saying that. In truth many would rank Montana higher than Marino, just for his rings. For Tony Gonzelaz, but not for Dan Marino and why is that?
Why
The easy answer is that quarterbacks are seen as the leader and often times the most important part of the team. When the team is doing good, most people will say the quarterback is the reason. If the time is garbage then the quarterback is to blame.
How many times have you seen a fan get mad at their quarterback after throwing a mistake on the game winning drive. The fan then forgets the three other quarterbacks, and the defense gave up 35 points. The quarterback doesn’t deserve all the blame or all the credit (if the team is winning).
The quarterback is an important position, but every great quarterback had wide receivers he passed to. Some great quarterbacks can have success with no name wide receivers or make a receiver’s stats look better than it really is. However every touchdown pass at the end of the day was caught by a different player (besides a handful of times when a pass was completed to the quarterback).
Judgment
Rings are important, but solely rating a player for them is wrong. What makes Tom Brady great is more than the seven rings. It’s the countless games he found a way to win in the fourth quarter, his great passes, and all the highlights.
A quarterback should be judged on how many rings he got, but should not be the only factor. We should judge his stats, comebacks, and all shorts of effort. ALl of the top five quarterbacks of all time have more in common then just multiple rings.
They all played great and found ways to win and lead their teams to the big game. A quarterback has a big part in championships, but so do all other guys. Remember Peyton’s last season (it was his defense), and even Brady had great defense when he was winning championships for New England.
