As a player, would you rather be in the hall of fame or get a Superbowl ring? This is based on the comment LT made.
It's different for every player. Take Pippen - HOFer, Dream Teamer & 6 rings and all he wants is to not be broke.
career wise, randy moss or deion branch? darrelle revis or jabari greer? barry sanders or kevin faulk? as a football player you can only do your job. you could be the greatest running back of all time but you will not win rings with a crappy coach, qb, o-line, receivers, defense, special teams, etc a wr can't block for his qb he can't throw the ball to himself. he can't be a pass rusher and shut down corner at the same time a hof career means you were great and consistent for a number of years. a ring would be nice but it doesn't define your career.
exactly would you rather be adam morrison or pat ewing espn mythologizes athletics. people are "winners" or "clutch" etc but any real athlete knows that what's important is how you prepare, not the outcome. you can't control wins and losses and what you take pride in is doing your job and working on your game. you can't control what franchise you go to or who your teammates are. you can't control the bounce of the ball you can however take responsibility in being a great player day in and day out and making your team better (even if it doesn't win)
but I think is very different to win a title as an average player or a scrub, than winning a title by being one of the players that brought that championship. and as a fan the decision is very different, what would you rather have on your team, a championship or 2/3 HOFs in your team? you can brag that your team won the championship, more than bragging about that team had 2/3 HOFs but didnt win anything. would the miami dolphins would trade their rings and undefeated season for a place in the HOF? (the players that are not in the HOF)
Lets assume Hines Ward isn't making the HOF and Randy Moss is. Hines Ward or Randy Moss? I'd actually probably take Ward's career, but that would be about more than just championships.
lebron james and chris bosh say hi but seriously, yeah you can. granted not right away, but free agency allows you to do just that. now does that mean it always works out? no, but you do have some what of a choice. most take whoever offers the most money, which you can't blame them. EDIT: to answer the question though, HOF. HOF means your career was pretty damn good your entire tenure. i'm sure dan marino has been asked that question before, what was his answer? anyone know?
It's a great point. The players that get asked this question are usually those in the boat with guys like Barkley and Ewing, Hall of Famers that made a ton of money. In football, I guess Dan Marino would be the biggest example. I'm sure there are a ton of other guys (none come to mind because they are for the most part anonymous and overlooked) that won a couple of rings, but only had careers spanning a few years. I'm not talking about a guy like Robert Horry or even Larry Izzo with the Pats. I'm thinking more of a 53rd man on a football team or 15th man on an NBA team. Those guys likely didn't make enough money in their playing careers to last them any significant amount of time and they aren't notable enough to get a cushy job with their organization or league. These guys are going to have to get real jobs to make ends meet and I'm almost certain those guys would trade their rings for a career like that of Marino or Barkley. For me, I'd take the Hall of Fame career.
I'd have to say HoF. Winning a ring has got to be one of the best feelings in the world... but you can be a 3rd string qb that has never seen playing time and get the ring. But, if you make it to the HoF, that's something that only a select few ever get to make... it means you're the best of the best.
Hines Ward is atleast close to a HoFer, so I'd say Ward. But a better question would be... Would you rather A. Be a total scrub and win multiple rings B. Be an average role player, nothing special, and win one ring C. HoF legend, with $$$ and fame forever but no rings
I would have to say HOF. Every player on one team wins a ring, but there are only one or two per generation that make the HOF. The ring is an instant gratification but a berth in the HOF means that they have had a really good career. Ideally everyone would like to win a few rings to supplement their HOF career but if not so be it. We still know who Dan Marino is who Charles Barkley or Patrick Ewing is and thats not because they have a ring its because they were consistently good over a long period of time. 15 years after Mike Miller or Mario Chalmers retire almost nobody will remember who they were despite their ring/rings. Guys like Ted Williams, Barkley will always be remembered as legends of the game, does anyone remember who Scott Wedman or Bob Mcadoo were?
Ring. The feelings aren't the same. Getting into the Hall of Fame is "just a piece of paper", while getting a ring is a journey, the entire playoffs, the finals, so much mixed emotions to finally get the ultimate reward. Must be amazing. Exactly like winning a tournament with your team (ring)... or having a bunch of spectators telling you you had a good game (hof).
I picked Ward since he is close. He enjoyed a very good career, is still very marketable, won a couple of championships, and will be loved in Pittsburgh the rest of his life. Basically in between B & C. Another example may end up being Kurt Warner or Dan Marino. Personally, I think Warner is a HOFer, but he is certainly no lock.
Take the Ring. There is a sense of completion that comes with it that cannot be matched by a successful career. This is why women prefer to date and marry men whose teams have won a championship ( See rocket fans.) because we are content and happy and at peace. Women who date men whose teams have not won a championship, rocky from the get go, disasters waiting to happen. The Championship brings a sort of satisfaction and peacefulness to a life. The Hall of Fame can't quite match it.
