@tour2ma said:

Definitely a sport, if tennis is.....

@stinkhole said:

move on loser & Pouncey is no Webster either..

@stinkhole said:

Regarding ping-pong- if you've ever seen Olympic level ping-pong, those guys definitely sweat. FWIW, I'd consider race car drivers more athletic than golfers.They only sweat if it's 90 degrees out. Driving 3X faster than freeway speeds with another car couple feet away from you, hair trigger reactions. One Indy car driver said his favorite activity (to build up his neck muscles) is watching TV. Try laying on a couch on your side, without a pillow- and see how long you can keep your head off the couch- if you can do it for an hour- you measure up to this guy.

@the-gipper said:

A sport is ...

• a human activity involving physical skill and exertion.
• governed by a set of rules or customs.
• undertaken competitively and capable of achieving a result.

There are many activities that are commonly debated whether they are sports, such as fishing, dancing, cheerleading, golf, equestrian, motorsports, plus many more. Based on the above criteria, are these sports?

The examples of golf and cheerleading easily fit the definition of sports when in the competitive form. Fishing and dancing for most people is a pastime and not a sport, but there are structured competitions with these activities which make it a sport in that form. In the case of equestrian and motorsports, there is physical exertion by the riders, but the horse and car are primarily doing the work. On the other hand, there is plenty of skill involved and it ticks all the other boxes. There will always be activities that are borderline and debateable whether they are sports or not. In that case, maybe the final defining point should be as per the definition by the ASC—it is a sport if it is ... "generally accepted as being a sport".

Per Topend Sports.

Golf is definitely a sport.

There have also been debates on who is considered an athlete and who is not.

I've heard racing fans and talking heads refer to race car drivers as "athletes". Thats bullshit.

Ive come up with an unusual criteria for what determines an athlete...it's called sweat.

To be considered an athlete, the sport in which you partake must require enough exertion to cause you to perspire.

Sitting in a hot race car, or an outfielder standing in the hot sun waiting for a ball to be hit to him doesn't count.

Athletes...football players, basketball players, soccer players, hockey players, tennis players, boxers/martial arts, rugby, lacrosse, track runners...

Non-athletes...golfers, bowlers, baseball players, jockeys, harness racing jockeys, race car drivers, motocross riders, skeet shooters/marksmanship....

Wait... do ping pong players perspire?

Shit, if they do that throws my theory out the window. lol

@gumby73 said:

Stinkhole. Mike Webster the guy in the movie Concussion gluing his teeth back in verse a guy that has never missed a snap in JT. Go wave your yellow hanky in the stinkhole we call Shitsburg..

Lol. You really get irrational when you're upset.

Aside from JT having to play roughly 3 more seasons to catch up to Websters 177 consecutive games played, your criteria/criticism was pretty stupid.

And Shitsburgh? You may as well call it Brownstown.

Grow up child.

Dustin Johnson great athlete, John Daly not a great athlete

Mike Trout great athlete, Bartolo Colon not a great athlete

@the-gipper said:

Well said Gip, and we'll leave it at that.

1. a human activity involving physical skill and exertion.
2. governed by a set of rules or customs.
3. undertaken competitively and capable of achieving a result.

What makes the list and what does not

There are many activities that are commonly debated whether they are sports, such as fishing, dancing, cheerleading, golf, equestrian, motorsports, plus many more. Based on the above criteria, are these sports?

The examples of golf and cheerleading easily fit the definition of sports when in the competitive form. Fishing and dancing for most people is a pastime and not a sport, but there are structured competitions with these activities which make it a sport in that form. In the case of equestrian and motorsports, there is physical exertion by the riders, but the horse and car are primarily doing the work. On the other hand, there is plenty of skill involved and it ticks all the other boxes. There will always be activities that are borderline and debateable whether they are sports or not. In that case, maybe the final defining point should be as per the definition by the ASC—it is a sport if it is ... "generally accepted as being a sport".

Per Topend Sports.

@columbusking said:

We got into a long argument about this a ways back, and it's not worth beating it to death again. There's those that claim golf is a sport- and I'd just let it be. A sport by definition requires athletic talent. Anyone consider John Daley an athlete? If it's the mental aspect, then I suppose chess is a "sport". Don't call it a "game" it's a skill- (like bowling) that will pay you a lot of money if you're good at it.

@hoorta said:

Well, I guess the question of "Where is someone from" can be debated. The state they were born in....even if they moved away as a baern....or the state they grew up in.

I say it is where they spent most of their developmental years. So Jordan would be from North Carolina, Steve Young from Connecticut. etc. And I think Russell would be California......and as between him and Joe D.??? You could throw in Tom Brady for Calif.

@texasag1969 said:

I just fucking realized you weren't directing your comment about mine being Nicklaus, which is whom I was referring to about Ohio.

@richiswhere said:

I agree with Gip- Jackson's career was too short to get the nod.

& PS Gip- had to look it up, Michael Jordan was born in New York- moved to NC. We can debate who's better, him or Kareem, but I'll give the nod to Jordan. Kareem's status is mostly due to longevity.

That got me to thinking, and looking it up again- for Louisiana I just might take Bill Russell (moved to California @ over Peyton Manning. And If you want to say Bill is primarily California, I take him over Joe D easy.

@stinkhole said:

I guess someone had to rank them....but really, I don't see a lot of difference between Webster and the likes of Jim Otto, Jim Ringo, Dermonti Dawson, Jim Langer, Dwight Stephenson, Mick Tinglehoff, Frank Gatski. Probably the nature of the position.

But, yet, yes.....before they are done both JT and Watt could be considered amongst the best at their position. Watt is being compared to Reggie White.

As for OTs, those considered the best ever are the likes of Anthony Munoz, Jonathan Ogden, Art Shell. Joe's problem, unlike these other, is that he has not played on a team that has won a lot....and that can hurt a guy, even if the losing has nothing to do with him.

(and hell....Jim Otto is from Wisconsin...so Webster may not even arguably be the best OC from there.)

But, I would still go with Eric Heiden as best athlete.....though the best "Sportsman" from Wisc. is probably Curly Lambeau...for his contributions as both a player and coach.

@flyingfooldoug said:

So if a 6ft 5 guy can throw a baseball 99mph...he's not an athlete?..smh

If I can throw a dart at a dartboard at 99mph, am I an athlete?

...and what does being 6ft 5 have to do with it?

@the-gipper said:

Hardly by light years. As noted, Webster went to 9 PBs....JT already has 8 (don't know if he will make it this year)....and he is just now in the prime of his career.

And Watt has a long way to go too. If you are arguing skill set...then you have to say that if Watt has a greater skill set than JT, then he certainly has a greater skill set over Webster. OTs are generally considered more "skilled" than OCs (How many OTs were picked in the Top 5 drafts the last few years vs. the number of OCs.

True, not light years. Miles lol.

Agree Watt does have a broader skill set than Webster.

But the reason you have to put Mike Webster there instead of either Watt or JT is because Webster is regarded by most as the best center to have ever played the game. That says more than Watt's skill set or JT's Pro Bowls. Neither JT or Watt would be in a conversation discussing the "best ever" at their respective positions.

Not YET anyway.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1090410-the-10-best-centers-in-nfl-history/page/11

And here is the funny thing: Only 8 players listed as centers have been selected in the first round since 2000 and three of them are:

Jeff Faine

Alex Mack

Cameron Erving all taken by the Browns.

the others were: Chris Spencer, Seattle. Nick Mangold Jets, Eric Wood Bills, Maurkice Pouncey Steelers and Travis Frederick, Cowboys

And Pouncey was the highest pick at #18....but Erving was next at #19

@stinkhole said:

Hardly by light years. As noted, Webster went to 9 PBs....JT already has 8 (don't know if he will make it this year)....and he is just now in the prime of his career.

And Watt has a long way to go too. If you are arguing skill set...then you have to say that if Watt has a greater skill set than JT, then he certainly has a greater skill set over Webster. OTs are generally considered more "skilled" than OCs (How many OTs were picked in the Top 5 drafts the last few years vs. the number of OCs.

@richiswhere said:

@stinkhole said:

Good arguments there on PA and GA.....certainly debatable.