CHAMPIONSHIPS ARE OVERRATED IN MOST TEAM SPORTS GOAT DISCUSSIONS

Since the advent of cable and then social media, sports commentators voting for MVPs and discussing GOATs in team sports felt more of a need because of the increased eyes on their opinions/votes to justify them.  And gradually, because titles gave tangible justification for ranking players higher – and glamorous ones at that – championships became more important in a player’s ranking and worth.  Now, I would argue, almost everyone (fans and commentators) have gone too far and are looking at championship requirements more emotionally than logically when ranking all-time team sport athletes.

Except for the Greatest NBA Players of All-time, and to a lesser degree, the Greatest NFL Quarterbacks of All-time (perhaps NHL hockey goalies too), championships should be given little consideration for how great a team sport athlete ranks in GOAT discussions.  The reason is quite simple and obvious – one player in all the other scenarios has little chance of having enough of an impact to drag a team to a championship.   

In my top 25 Greatest Players of All-time list, which is similar to other lists (e.g., ESPN), the first 17 players (Karl Malone at 18, Elgin Baylor 19, Charles Barkley 21, all with no titles) all have at least one championship and the top 9 (Jordan, LeBron, Jabbar, Russell, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Duncan, Kobe) all have at least 2.  

Almost everyone sees this as reasonable given that a great basketball player can have a huge impact on the outcome of a game with them playing both offensively and defensively and playing a large percentage of the game (40 of 48 minutes, or 83%).  And the seven game series reduces the luck that doesn’t exist in the single elimination NFL (or soccer) playoff format.  

Also, the quarterback only plays about a little over 40% of the game or half what the NBA player plays.  Hence, the NFL titles mean less for the NFL quarterbacks rankings than NBA players but are still important because of the huge impact a quarterback can have on a game due to the uniqueness of the position.  

In addition to all this, pro players, especially NBA players and NFL quarterbacks have long careers (13-23+ years) so their chances of winning a championship are much greater than college athletes for example.  College athletes generally have four years with men’s basketball athletes often having only one year for an elite player nowadays (and some football players only stay three years).  

Some athletes' chances are much greater because they went to elite blue blood programs but many did not.  Hence, using championships as a MAJOR criterion for college athletes is silly and unfair given their short careers, single elimination tournaments (increasing the chances of luck), and the quality of the programs they choose.     

The problem becomes especially apparent in women’s college basketball, where Caitlin Clark’s lack of a title has been used by some people as a shortcut to dismiss her all-time standing by  Caitlin Clark haters and the followers of Connecticut, Tennessee, South Carolina, LSU and the like.  I have never seen the lack of a college ring be held against any college athlete as much as it has against Caitlin Clark.  This despite dragging a mediocre team to the NCAA finals two years in a row at a program that had not been to the finals in 30 years.  And in her six most important games of her life (elite 8, final 4, and finals her junior and senior years) she played 3 of the top 10 greatest games played in the history of women’s college basketball.

I mention her because this is where the “chip” thing went off the deep end as people followed the highly questionable lead of commentator Jay Williams who wouldn’t even say she was “great” (hint: he won a title at Duke).  To show you how ridiculous the title requirement has gotten and changed with Clark, google the greatest men’s college basketball players of all-time and you will find that both Pete Maravich and Oscar Robertson are consistently ranked in the top 5 and neither one of them won an NCAA title (three tries each).  

However, sanity was restored somewhat on March 23, 2026 when FOX Sports named Caitlin Clark the 2nd Greatest Women College Basketball Player of All-time (behind Breanna Stewart) and six months ago (October 2025) an AP panel of 13 voters (six former players and seven AP writers) voted Clark one of the five greatest players ever (the only one without a NCAA title in their top 5).  

This is a good push back that we need more of before everyone just says, “no greatness without a chip” and the discussion ends.  Championships matter. But in most team sports, they should be a supporting factor in GOAT discussions—not the deciding one. The smarter question is not whether a player won a title, but how much control that player realistically had over winning it.