Why is Joe Namath in the HOF?

[Behindenemylines]

Plus he would visit integrated families that had a very sick/terminal child that wanted a visit from him as their dying wish. He would throw the ole pigskin around with them and their friends when he could....oh sh$t that was a Brady bunch episode.  Sorry

[Stanley Lombardi]

 

 

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

 

For the space of maybe 5 years, Namath was the most famous player in football.  Somewhere in that sentence lies the kernel of his inclusion in the "Hall of Fame."  See if you can locate it.

[Nextmanup]

58 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

Perhaps it's because he and the New York Jets legitimized the teams from the old AFL as being as good as the established NFL teams. 

This is the answer.

 

He was the young, dynamic, cocky face of the newcomer AFL in its infancy and he predicted--and achieved--a victory against the established NFL in Superbowl III.

 

He probably gets in on that alone.

 

 

[BuffaninSarasota]

Why does the moon look like Swiss cheese? (Will Ferrell impersonating Harry Caray)

[First Round Bust]

why is John Stallworth in ?  esp when his counter-part Lynn Swann is in as well during the era of ground-n-pound..simply cuz the Steelers were all that...just like Broadway Joe was

[SoTier]

43 minutes ago, MJS said:

People bring it up that it was a different era and there are other QB's in the HofF who also have thrown more picks than TD's.

 

But what they fail to mention is that Namath also lost more games than he won.

 

First off, "different eras" doesn't come close to describing what pro football was like in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and especially for QBs.    QBs had virtually no protection from anything except late hits.  The measure of a good/great QB was his ability to stand in a collapsing pocket and heave the ball downfield to a WR 30 or more yards beyond the LOS -- and to know when to do it because QBs called their own plays back then.   Receivers were regularly mugged by LBs and DBs ... and it was perfectly legal.  In that kind of game,  a completion percentage of 50% was about the best QBs could do, and frequently throwing far down field resulted in lots of INTs. 

 

As for Namath losing more games than he lost, QBs don't play the game alone.  They didn't then and they don't now.  For most of Namath's career, the Jets sucked.   Part of that was, like most of the AFL teams that joined the NFL, the Bills included, they simply didn't have enough NFL caliber talent to compete regularly with the established NFL teams, three of which moved to the new AFC: Baltimore Colts, Cleveland Browns, and Pittsburgh Steelers.   The Colts dumped Don Shula after failing to make the playoffs after the 1969 season and went on to win the Super Bowl the next season.  Shula went on the Dolphins where he proceeded to make the Jets suffer for that SB win for a couple of decades.

[MJS]

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

First off, "different eras" doesn't come close to describing what pro football was like in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and especially for QBs.    QBs had virtually no protection from anything except late hits.  The measure of a good/great QB was his ability to stand in a collapsing pocket and heave the ball downfield to a WR 30 or more yards beyond the LOS -- and to know when to do it because QBs called their own plays back then.   Receivers were regularly mugged by LBs and DBs ... and it was perfectly legal.  In that kind of game,  a completion percentage of 50% was about the best QBs could do, and frequently throwing far down field resulted in lots of INTs. 

 

As for Namath losing more games than he lost, QBs don't play the game alone.  They didn't then and they don't now.  For most of Namath's career, the Jets sucked.   Part of that was, like most of the AFL teams that joined the NFL, the Bills included, they simply didn't have enough NFL caliber talent to compete regularly with the established NFL teams, three of which moved to the new AFC: Baltimore Colts, Cleveland Browns, and Pittsburgh Steelers.   The Colts dumped Don Shula after failing to make the playoffs after the 1969 season and went on to win the Super Bowl the next season.  Shula went on the Dolphins where he proceeded to make the Jets suffer for that SB win for a couple of decades.

Blah blah blah.

 

He wasn't a winner. He won one great, historic game and that is why he is in. And I think he probably deserves to be in just because of how momentous that win was, but it is pretty sad for the franchise that Namath is the best they've had.

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

1 hour ago, Chaos said:

In person Joe Namath is one of the nicest most personable people you could ever meet. I suspect the sports writers who vote for the hall of fame truly liked the  guy. 

Free kisses! 😘

[First Round Bust]

Just now, MJS said:

Blah blah blah.

 

He wasn't a winner. He won one great, historic game and that is why he is in. And I think he probably deserves to be in just because of how momentous that win was, but it is pretty sad for the franchise that Namath is the best they've had.

Namath is to the Jets, what Seaver is to the Mets...1969 made the legends...Seaver's body of work much more impressive and Hall-of-Fame beyond any doubts, so dont go there friendoes

[Bray Wyatt]

He was also the first to pass for over 4k yards in a season

 

Lasted until 1979 when Fouts broke it, but did so in a 16 game season where Namath did it in 14

Edited September 4, 2020 by Bray Wyatt

[K-9]

39 minutes ago, BuffaninSarasota said:

Why does the moon look like Swiss cheese? (Will Ferrell impersonating Harry Caray)

[BuffaninSarasota]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

 

BINGO !!!!

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I have to disagree that just being part of the NFL's story makes you HOF worthy.  And while its called the Hall of Fame, we all know that the basis of the HOF is to enshrine its best.  Not its most flamboyant, flashy, or famous.  Otherwise guys like Jim McMahon would be in there too.  

 

I don't disagree that Namath has a place in the story of the history of the NFL, but so do a lot of people also not in the HOF.  I mean, he has a case to be the worst player of any sport enshrined into its HOF.  

 

Namath was not a good QB, thats just the facts.  And no one would care at all about him had he not made that prediction, just like no one cares about many underdog teams QB's who won the SB.  Without the prediction, he's just a flashy but bad QB from NY who hit lightning in a bottle one time...for one game.   

 

 

 

So then why is he in the HOF if it's not  for the story part?

 

And stating he shouldn't be in the HOF isn't an answer because he is there.  So then why, if not the story, not the talent, then why??

[Rocky Landing]

Nobody played better hungover than Namath.

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by Rocky Landing

[sherpa]

Regardless of his stats, or the fact that he was responsible for AFL credibility, the man was a simply great "thrower."

I used to go to those games two hours early, because a friend's dad was an usher.

I watched all of the QB's throw during warm ups.

 

Nobody, Bills QB or visitors, threw lasers like he did.

His ball was like a snap. Incredibly quick release, almost no trajectory.

It was a string, whether a five yard out or a thirty yard post.

He's in the Hall of Fame because he beat the Colts, but that man could throw.

Edited September 4, 2020 by sherpa

[smuvtalker]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

Statistically impossible to disagree with you on this.   His stats defy logic as to why he's in Canton.  Perhaps "moxie"???  Flair??  Beats the crap out of me.  

[Taro T]

13 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

He was also the first to pass for over 4k yards in a season

 

Lasted until 1979 when Fouts broke it, but did so in a 16 game season where Namath did it in 14

 

Yep.

 

He won the national championship for Bama in '64 & it was a huge coup the he ended up w/ the Jets of the upstart AFL rather than in the NFL.  He added a huge degree of respectability to the AFL.

 

As somebody said upthread, he was far and away tue most visible football player of the late '60's.  It helped being based out of NYC, but he was the face of the AFL and was probably even more recognized than Unitas, Butkus, or Starr. 

 

And nobody expected the Jets to keep the SB close, much less actually win it.  Even without the prediction, with all the rest, as soon as they won the SB he became an eventual lock for the HoF.

 

OP brings up Jim McMahon..  Very few people speak of McMahon & he was overshadowed on that '85 team by Sweetness, the Fridge, & Singletary (Even Ditka & Buddy Ryan are more recognizable & remembered today IMHO).  NOBODY overshadowed Broadway Joe.

[Rico]

Nice thread, proving yet again that stats are for losers.

[Don Otreply]

2 hours ago, Logic said:

When it comes to Hall of Fame inclusion, I’ve always subscribed to the criteria “can you tell the story of the NFL without including this player?”
 

In the case of Joe Namath, you cannot.

This ^^^
 

And he Drops the 🎤 

[BuffaninSarasota]

He gets in for those Aqua Velva commercials

 

[Royale with Cheese]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

 

I've been saying this for years!  He also has a 50% career completion percentage.

[KD in CA]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

The perfect explanation.  

 

I don't know how old Alpha is, but if you weren't a football fan during that period, you almost can't understand. 

 

My son asked me once whether there would even be another Beatles, and the answer is clearly "no."  The Beatles were the Beatles not because they were the greatest band ever; they weren't.  Not because they had the longest run of excellence; they didn't.  They were the Beatles because they became superstars at a time when it was still possible to get the attention of the entire country.  EVERYBODY knew about the Beatles, and practically EVERYBODY watched the Ed Sullivan Show when they were on. 

 

Namath caught the end of that era, and era when it was possible to be a true nation-wide phenomenon.  He was in the news all the time - everyone knew what Namath was wearing, whom he was dating, everything.   At that moment in time the Packers seemed to have proved what most people thought - that the AFL teams were inferior to the NFL team.  Along comes the guy who is probably the most famous - not the best, but most famous - team sport athlete in the country, and he proves the Packers wrong.  It was huge news, a defining moment in the emergence of professional football as the number one professional sport in the country.   Joe Namath was on the Ed Sullivan Show after he won the Super Bowl.

 

Mahomes is a good comparison.  Mahomes captured the imagination of the football public like Namath did, but in the modern world of 24-7 sports coverage, his impact never could be as great as Namath's was.  Mahomes wins the Super Bowl, and he's on late-night shows.  The whole country watched Namath; some nightowls watched Mahomes.  

 

Namath just happened to be the right guy in the right place at the right time.  

 

This is the complete answer to the OP's question.

 

Not only can't you tell the story of the NFL without Namath, he's one of the first five players you have to mention on the list.   

Do people think they'll still be talking about Mahomes in in the year 2070?  I doubt it.

[Royale with Cheese]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree. And this is absolutely my criteria. It is the hall of FAME not the hall of TALENT. Now often times those two intersect.... but you have the odd exception. Joe Namath is one. Eli Manning will be another. On the pure numbers Eli Manning is not a Hall of Famer. But the story? The two drives to win Superbowls? You can't tell the tale of the NFL without them. So Eli will make it. 

 

I don't know if I can agree with this.  I don't think you can be one of the worst players at your position and then make the HOF.  Namath was that bad.

[billsfan89]

His cultural relevance to the sport. In the late 60's and early 70's he was footballs biggest star and probably in part legitimized the AFL NFL merger. On the field he has a few great seasons by the standards of the time but then petered out due to injury. But his relevance to the sport is greater than his on field accolades 

[Royale with Cheese]

2 hours ago, Logic said:

When it comes to Hall of Fame inclusion, I’ve always subscribed to the criteria “can you tell the story of the NFL without including this player?”
 

In the case of Joe Namath, you cannot.

 

Then Doug Williams should be in the Hall of Fame.

[Chandler#81]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

I’m surprised -and frankly disappointed in this thread. Your only saving grace may be your age (not old enough to know better).The number 1 reason a player gets voted into the HOF is if he changed the game during his career. Joe Willie Whiteshoes altered the pro game as few others have. The most gifted passer to ever come out of college, he was given a jaw-dropping rookie contract to sign with the AFL during the player wars of the early/mid ‘60s. Truly staggering for the time, it gave absolute legitimacy to the upstart League. This was an era where the best pro players had to have offseason jobs just to sustain.  Watching him throw a football was a wonder to behold. More awe-inspiring than the rookie Marino would do 20 years later. His signing and the national hoopla surrounding him literally forced the merger of the 2 Leagues -something no other upstart League has done since. In just his 5th year, he led his team to the undisputed greatest upset in sports history. A million+ nfl players since owe and have paid a great debt of gratitude to him for their personal opportunity. Using today’s passing stats have nothing to do with the awesome fear he struck in every opponent he faced. He was one if the very few in the Leagues’ first half century who was a threat on every play.

 

So, if you’re an uniformed Whippersnapper, you get a mulligan on this unwitting snafu. If not, turn in your man card.

[Alphadawg7]

32 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

This is the complete answer to the OP's question.

 

Not only can't you tell the story of the NFL without Namath, he's one of the first five players you have to mention on the list.   

Do people think they'll still be talking about Mahomes in in the year 2070?  I doubt it.

 

I guarantee they will talk about Mahomes a lot more than anyone talks about Namath.  Once the people are gone who watched Namath play, no one will talk about him.  Mahomes is on a path to be the greatest of all time, and if he reaches that pinnacle he will be talked about forever.  I mean, Namath isn't even remotely talked about even today compared to people who talk about guys like Montana for instance.  People talk about greatness, its true in every sport.  If Mahomes continues on the path he is on, he will be talked about like Jordan is talked about.  Namath doesn't get talked about at all really unless he's saying something creepy to a female reporter or appearing drunk while on camera.  

[CardinalScotts]

Griese is the one for me all kinds of awards pro bowls, all pro, hall of fame ?

He did call his own plays so I do give him a ton of credit for that-- for not letting himself throw it much

pro bowl on seasons of 109--149--150 yds a game    The super bowl run 1973 throwing in the last two games for 26 and 66 yards? Was there a blizard in Miami

[Malazan]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I guarantee they will talk about Mahomes a lot more than anyone talks about Namath.  Once the people are gone who watched Namath play, no one will talk about him.  Mahomes is on a path to be the greatest of all time, and if he reaches that pinnacle he will be talked about forever.  I mean, Namath isn't even remotely talked about even today compared to people who talk about guys like Montana for instance.  People talk about greatness, its true in every sport.  If Mahomes continues on the path he is on, he will be talked about like Jordan is talked about.  Namath doesn't get talked about at all really unless he's saying something creepy to a female reporter or appearing drunk while on camera.  

 

This seems to be veering off from, "Joe Namath doesn't have the stats to be in the hall" to some sort of personal vendetta against Namath for...saying something creepy to you when you were interviewing him?

[Royale with Cheese]

5 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

I’m surprised -and frankly disappointed in this thread. Your only saving grace may be your age (not old enough to know better).The number 1 reason a player gets voted into the HOF is if he changed the game during his career. Joe Willie Whiteshoes altered the pro game as few others have. The most gifted passer to ever come out of college, he was given a jaw-dropping rookie contract to sign with the AFL during the player wars of the early/mid ‘60s. Truly staggering for the time, it gave absolute legitimacy to the upstart League. This was an era where the best pro players had to have offseason jobs just to sustain.  Watching him throw a football was a wonder to behold. More awe-inspiring than the rookie Marino would do 20 years later. His signing and the national hoopla surrounding him literally forced the merger of the 2 Leagues -something no other upstart League has done since. In just his 5th year, he led his team to the undisputed greatest upset in sports history. A million+ nfl players since owe and have paid a great debt of gratitude to him for their personal opportunity. Using today’s passing stats have nothing to do with the awesome fear he struck in every opponent he faced. He was one if the very few in the Leagues’ first half century who was a threat on every play.

 

So, if you’re an uniformed Whippersnapper, you get a mulligan on this unwitting snafu. If not, turn in your man card.

 

The defense led the greatest upset in sports history.  Namath and the offense didn't really do anything in that game.

Now go drink your Metamucil old man!

[Chandler#81]

20 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

The defense led the greatest upset in sports history.  Namath and the offense didn't really do anything in that game.

Now go drink your Metamucil old man!

NY’s Defense was special in that era, make no mistake. I remember them well. Cleveland was the only team to beat Baltimore in ‘68 and the Colts took it very personal by trouncing them in the title game 34-0. Jets had no such problem with the vaunted Colt Defense. Joe consistently led long time consuming drives, most of which turned into points. Jets great Defense was actually pretty pathetic on the super Sunday, as the Colts screamed up & down the field with huge gains all day. They just couldn’t finish drives as Morrall had 3 picks & Johnny U had 1. 

Maynard reinjured his hamstring on the 1st play and wasn’t thrown to again all day. Sauer had his way with the Colt CB all day and Snell rushed for over 100 yrds. 

 

Challenging my knowledge of the AFL is done at your own peril. I’ll embarrass you.😉

[KD in CA]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I guarantee they will talk about Mahomes a lot more than anyone talks about Namath.  Once the people are gone who watched Namath play, no one will talk about him.  Mahomes is on a path to be the greatest of all time, and if he reaches that pinnacle he will be talked about forever.  I mean, Namath isn't even remotely talked about even today compared to people who talk about guys like Montana for instance.  People talk about greatness, its true in every sport.  If Mahomes continues on the path he is on, he will be talked about like Jordan is talked about.  Namath doesn't get talked about at all really unless he's saying something creepy to a female reporter or appearing drunk while on camera.  

 

In 50 years??  Not a chance.  None.  All events/people pass into history so that's a poor argument.

 

You're just missing how big a cultural icon he was but more broadly how icons were viewed in his era vs today.   For example, no boxer will ever be bigger than Ali, regardless of record.  You're also missing Namath's impact on the league, which might be greater than any other player ever.  Certainly in the top handful.

 

Personally, I prefer it remain a 'Hall of Fame' and not a 'Hall of Football Statistics'.

 

[Rk_Bills86]

I'll be the first to say I don't like Joe Namath - and by extension I don't like the majority of Jets fans that hang on their Superbowl victory as though it makes them some sort of dynasty. However, considering the time in which he played, the respect he had from players, and his stats during his era, he is basically about right for a HoF entry from that time period. 

 

Couple of quick notes:

 

Still the Jets all time leading passer - career and single season (14 game seasons)

Only Jet QB to ever throw for 4000 yds (67' think about how long ago that was)

He did win a ring

 

[Royale with Cheese]

6 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

NY’s Defense was special in that era, make no mistake. I remember them well. Cleveland was the only team to beat Baltimore in ‘68 and the Colts took it very personal by trouncing them in the title game 34-0. Jets had no such problem with the vaunted Colt Defense. Joe consistently led long time consuming drives, most of which turned into points. Jets great Defense was actually pretty pathetic on the super Sunday, as the Colts screamed up & down the field with huge gains all day. They just couldn’t finish drives as Morrall had 3 picks & Johnny U had 1. 

Challenging my knowledge of the AFL is done at your own peril. I’ll embarrass you.😉

 

[Alphadawg7]

32 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

 

This seems to be veering off from, "Joe Namath doesn't have the stats to be in the hall" to some sort of personal vendetta against Namath for...saying something creepy to you when you were interviewing him?

 

Im just saying, when was the last time Namath was really talked about?  When he seemed drunk and told the female reporter on camera he just wants to kiss her.  

 

Sorry, thats not a vendetta, thats just what happened.  Meanwhile, people in the GOAT conversations will always be talked about.  And my response was to someone who said Mahomes wont be talked about in 50 years...and I was saying that if Mahomes continues his path to looking like being one of the GOATS, if not the GOAT, when he is done, they will still be talking about him 50 years from now.  Just like they talk about other greats in all sports.  

[Royale with Cheese]

6 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

In 50 years??  Not a chance.  None.  All events/people pass into history so that's a poor argument.

 

You're just missing how big a cultural icon he was but more broadly how icons were viewed in his era vs today.   For example, no boxer will ever be bigger than Ali, regardless of record.  You're also missing Namath's impact on the league, which might be greater than any other player ever.  Certainly in the top handful.

 

Personally, I prefer it remain a 'Hall of Fame' and not a 'Hall of Football Statistics'.

 

 

If Mahomes continues his pace, he will absolutely be talked about 50 years from now.  People still talk about greats today from more than 50 years ago that didn't have the popularity as Namath.  I'm 38 and I talk and hear about players well before my time.  

 

From what I understand, Joe Louis was on top of the world in his prime.  He had the nation watching him before his fights with Max Schemilling because of the Anti-Nazi setiment.  No one thought the sport would have someone bigger.  Well...30 years later....Ali came along.

 

If someone comes along and dominates their sport and wins championships/belts like no one before him/her....then they will be bigger than the previous King of the Mountain.

[KD in CA]

9 minutes ago, Rk_Bills86 said:

I'll be the first to say I don't like Joe Namath - and by extension I don't like the majority of Jets fans that hang on their Superbowl victory as though it makes them some sort of dynasty. However, considering the time in which he played, the respect he had from players, and his stats during his era, he is basically about right for a HoF entry from that time period. 

 

Couple of quick notes:

 

Still the Jets all time leading passer - career and single season (14 game seasons)

Only Jet QB to ever throw for 4000 yds (67' think about how long ago that was)

He did win a ring

 

 

First guy to do that by a mile.....10 years later Fergy led the league in pass with 2800 yards.  Fouts didn't break Namath's record until 1980.   

 

 

[Taro T]

38 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

I’m surprised -and frankly disappointed in this thread. Your only saving grace may be your age (not old enough to know better).The number 1 reason a player gets voted into the HOF is if he changed the game during his career. Joe Willie Whiteshoes altered the pro game as few others have. The most gifted passer to ever come out of college, he was given a jaw-dropping rookie contract to sign with the AFL during the player wars of the early/mid ‘60s. Truly staggering for the time, it gave absolute legitimacy to the upstart League. This was an era where the best pro players had to have offseason jobs just to sustain.  Watching him throw a football was a wonder to behold. More awe-inspiring than the rookie Marino would do 20 years later. His signing and the national hoopla surrounding him literally forced the merger of the 2 Leagues -something no other upstart League has done since. In just his 5th year, he led his team to the undisputed greatest upset in sports history. A million+ nfl players since owe and have paid a great debt of gratitude to him for their personal opportunity. Using today’s passing stats have nothing to do with the awesome fear he struck in every opponent he faced. He was one if the very few in the Leagues’ first half century who was a threat on every play.

 

So, if you’re an uniformed Whippersnapper, you get a mulligan on this unwitting snafu. If not, turn in your man card.

 

Umm, 20 late '70's college kids and a coach from the frozen lakes of Minnesota say 'hi.'

[Chandler#81]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

 

Umm, 20 late '70's college kids and a coach from the frozen lakes of Minnesota say 'hi.'

amatures.

[Alphadawg7]

18 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

In 50 years??  Not a chance.  None.  All events/people pass into history so that's a poor argument.

 

You're just missing how big a cultural icon he was but more broadly how icons were viewed in his era vs today.   For example, no boxer will ever be bigger than Ali, regardless of record.  You're also missing Namath's impact on the league, which might be greater than any other player ever.  Certainly in the top handful.

 

Personally, I prefer it remain a 'Hall of Fame' and not a 'Hall of Football Statistics'.

 

 

Huh?  Not sure how that makes sense, I mean all time great players, especially ones with resumes that give them cases for GOAT conversations at their position or overall in their sport, are discussed still to this day from all eras in all sports.  Even Ali, who you just mentioned, is still regularly talked about.