Vote off Athlete of the decade (nominations)

[thedude]

I'm pretty meh on including Jimmie Johnson. I'm totally on board the two NFL selections of Brady and Manning. For the NBA, I think you've got to go with Bryant and O'Neil who was an All-Star every year this decade aside from '08, won 4 Championships (played in 5), same as Kobe. I think Duncan just misses the list because of Shaq. I'd also give the hockey nod to Martin Brodeur, if you're going to go with just one hockey player. Arguably the best net minder of all-time, and he was the best hockey player of the decade as far as I'm concerned.

Good point on the Hockey. However, I think Duncan was more consistant than Shaq this decade. Shaq was very domiant at the early years, but faded in the middle and end. Duncan was a ten time all-star (Shaq 9), 2 time MVP (Shaq 1), 7 all defense first teams. I guess we could include Shaq as well though.

NFL:Brady, Manning
NBA: Bryant, Duncan, Shaq
MLB: Pujols, Bonds, A-Rod
Golf: Woods
Cycling: Armstrong
Swimming: Phelps
MMA: Money Mayweather
NHL: Lindstrom, Martin Brodeur
Soccer: Ronaldinho
NASCAR: Jimmie Johnson
Running: Haile Gebrselassie
Tennis: Federer


That gives us 18. 2 more to make a round number would probably work. Any ideas on other Soccer players? Messi?

Other soccer players worth considering would be Thierry Henry, Lionel Messi, and Cristiano Ronaldo, but I'd probably just keep it at Ronaldinho as the lone soccer representative. I'd probably just cut Jimmie Johnson, Haile Gerbrunner, and Shaq or Duncan and just roll with 15.

Sounds like a good idea. to me.

[The Artful Dodger]

Yuck, these athlete of the decade debates are bloody pointless, but I'll lend you a hand:

Soccer: Ronaldinho

Hmmm... I would say Ronaldinho, hands down, but after the 2005-06 season, he really tailed off. Chalk it up to a combination of being overworked and lazy, but from '03-06 (prior to the 06 World Cup), he was absolutely brilliant. Great pace and most importantly, he had the best understanding of spacing and shooting/passing angles from any striker in this decade. One of my favorite moments as a Barcelona fan has to be when he put on a masterclass performance in a drubbing of the hated enemies, Real Madrid that it even provoked Real Madrid supporters to give Barca a standing ovation.

The problem about footballers (erm, soccer players) is that their prime, assuming their healthy, is a relatively short one compared to other athletes. In terms of longevity, I'll put Ryan Giggs and the recently retired Paolo Maldini up there. Giggs, in particular, has played his best since the turn of the last decade in the last couple of seasons. I would probably put Zinedine Zidane up for consideration as well, as he still sustained his peak from the '98 World Cup and Juventus days into his career at Real Madrid, even though his career ended on an infamous note. I'd regularly put Zidane in my top 10 of greatest footballers ever, FWIW. Thierry Henry is worth another shout, as he was probably the best Premier League scorer this decade and has adjusted well enough at Barcelona to be a big part in winning The European Treble last term.

Currently, Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo are regarded as the best, but neither of them have yet to hit their prime and their breakout seasons happened in the latter half of this decade.

If you're going to include Jimmie Johnson, you might as well throw in Michael Schumacher, as he won 5 titles in a row in Formula 1, which is what the world watches instead of plain oval racing easily stereotyped for a hillbilly sport, NASCAR.

As far as MMA goes, even though he's not in UFC, I'd think Fedor is worth a shout whereas in boxing, you'd have to throw Manny Pacquiao's name in the hat too.

Apart from my two cents, this athlete of the decade talk is still rubbish.

[thedude]

Yuck, these athlete of the decade debates are bloody pointless, but I'll lend you a hand:

Meh passes the time.

[Metroid]

Man the nominations process ended quick.

Surprised not one female athlete on the list. Annika Sorenstam won eight of 10 majors and finished first on the money list five years in a row. Pretty impressive, more impressive than a juiced up Barry Bonds hitting baseballs really far.

And what about Venus or Serena?

[Mookie4ever]

NFL:Brady, Manning
NBA: Bryant, Duncan, Shaq
MLB: Pujols, Bonds, A-Rod
Golf: Woods
Cycling: Armstrong
Swimming: Phelps
MMA: Money Mayweather
NHL: Lindstrom, Martin Brodeur
Soccer: Ronaldinho
NASCAR: Jimmie Johnson
Running: Haile Gebrselassie
Tennis: Federer

If you include Nascar you also have to include ping pong and snooker imo.
Baseball doesn't belong. Just not athletic enough.
No way golfers should be on the list. Far too few peolple play it and it is more skill than athleticism.
If you are going to include american football I would probably prefer a running back or a defensive back or somebody who does something more than just throw. But I wouldn't include any american footballers since it's exclusively an american sport and nobody else in the world cares about it.

[Metroid]

Would you include hockey Mook?

Just because a sport is largely played in one region or in just a few regions of the world doesn't make the athletes any more or less worthy of being athlete of the decade. I'd agree that race car drivers, golfers, and Texas Hold'em poker players should probably be excluded, but NFL players? Yeah they most certainly belong there for consideration. Just because "most of the world doesn't care about them" doesn't mean they aren't some of the finest athletes in the world.

Also the members of this site are largely from North America, of course the sports and athletes we are familiar with are going to be the major players.

[Pogotheostrich]

NFL:Brady, Manning
NBA: Bryant, Duncan, Shaq
MLB: Pujols, Bonds, A-Rod
Golf: Woods
Cycling: Armstrong
Swimming: Phelps
MMA: Money Mayweather
NHL: Lindstrom, Martin Brodeur
Soccer: Ronaldinho
NASCAR: Jimmie Johnson
Running: Haile Gebrselassie
Tennis: Federer

... it is more skill than athleticism.

If you take the opposite view cycling, swimming, and running are more athleticism than skill.

[Mookie4ever]

NFL:Brady, Manning
NBA: Bryant, Duncan, Shaq
MLB: Pujols, Bonds, A-Rod
Golf: Woods
Cycling: Armstrong
Swimming: Phelps
MMA: Money Mayweather
NHL: Lindstrom, Martin Brodeur
Soccer: Ronaldinho
NASCAR: Jimmie Johnson
Running: Haile Gebrselassie
Tennis: Federer

... it is more skill than athleticism.

If you take the opposite view cycling, swimming, and running are more athleticism than skill.

True. The poll though is for athlete of the decade and not sportsperson.

How about Yang Wei?

[Mookie4ever]

Would you include hockey Mook?

Just because a sport is largely played in one region or in just a few regions of the world doesn't make the athletes any more or less worthy of being athlete of the decade. I'd agree that race car drivers, golfers, and Texas Hold'em poker players should probably be excluded, but NFL players? Yeah they most certainly belong there for consideration. Just because "most of the world doesn't care about them" doesn't mean they aren't some of the finest athletes in the world.

Also the members of this site are largely from North America, of course the sports and athletes we are familiar with are going to be the major players.

True and true. I love hockey but it's very regional. My only point about nfl is that you can't say that winning the "world" championship is as meaningful as winning the world cup of soccer where truely the entire world participates. It's the equivalent of winning the California championship vs. the national championship. It's just not as great an accomplishment winning out of a pool of 300 million people whereas soccer has a potential pool of over 6 million participants. Sure they can be great athletes (wasn't jesse owens or Jim Thorpe a football player?) but I just don't see any great athletes in the NFL. Maybe Champ Bailey or Charles Woodson but the sport doesn't highlight great athletes.

As far as the QBs Peyton and Brady are just not very well rounded. They don't run, jump, catch or do anything other than throw a ball.

[Metroid]

Would you include hockey Mook?

Just because a sport is largely played in one region or in just a few regions of the world doesn't make the athletes any more or less worthy of being athlete of the decade. I'd agree that race car drivers, golfers, and Texas Hold'em poker players should probably be excluded, but NFL players? Yeah they most certainly belong there for consideration. Just because "most of the world doesn't care about them" doesn't mean they aren't some of the finest athletes in the world.

Also the members of this site are largely from North America, of course the sports and athletes we are familiar with are going to be the major players.

True and true. I love hockey but it's very regional. My only point about nfl is that you can't say that winning the "world" championship is as meaningful as winning the world cup of soccer where truely the entire world participates. It's the equivalent of winning the California championship vs. the national championship. It's just not as great an accomplishment winning out of a pool of 300 million people whereas soccer has a potential pool of over 6 million participants. Sure they can be great athletes (wasn't jesse owens or Jim Thorpe a football player?) but I just don't see any great athletes in the NFL. Maybe Champ Bailey or Charles Woodson but the sport doesn't highlight great athletes.

As far as the QBs Peyton and Brady are just not very well rounded. They don't run, jump, catch or do anything other than throw a ball.

Oh come on, they do a lot more than just throw a ball. Guys like Peyton and Brady are field generals, constantly deciphering defenses and adjusting their game, and their teams game around them. The entire success of a football season largely rests squarely on the shoulders of the most important position on the field, and that's the QB position. It's not very often a team has success with a less than stellar QB, and if they do it isn't for long. Manning and Brady have consistently kept their teams in contention for the last 10 years. I think that's pretty damn impressive. I think that people do tend to view NFL athletes as the top of the heap because it's the sport that dominates the headlines here. I'd agree that there are far more deserving athletes that should have the title of "Athlete of the Decade" but you can't dismiss NFL athletes, even QB's, as irrelevant to the discussion.

just my opinion.