Remember This: “GOAT” Is a Fool’s Errand

The idea of the Greatest of All Time (GOAT) is almost always a discussion lacking context and reduces history to irrelevance.  That, I would argue, is a bad idea.  Whether it is sports, entertainment, politics, or anything else, this just in: you can only produce in the era you live.

There are bars across America that would close if there were a law against arguing about who was the greatest football player of all time.  Tom Brady played in 10 Super Bowls and won seven. This month, we witnessed heated conversations as to whether or not the Kansas City Chiefs won their third straight Super Bowl, which justified “replacing” Tom Brady with Patrick Mahomes as the GOAT, or at least the GOAT quarterback.

The entire discussion is testimony we have failed to teach history for far too long.  Do yourself a favor.  The next time that debate starts, ask the participants where they would place Sid Luckman, Bobby Layne, Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, or any number of other QBs.  You might even have the poor taste to ask about Red Grange, Jimmy Brown, or Walter Payton.  That is only one other position, running back, on one side of the ball, offense.  Defense has not even been introduced for consideration.

Even if you decide that QB is such an important position in the game, we will only consider that position in the argument; all historical context is lost.  Instantly, someone will say, “The athletes are so much better today.”  It is hard to disagree with that notion since it is the absolute truth.  However, that means whoever dominates the most recent period is, by default, the GOAT.  

Here is a question for those folks.  Since all the other people totally dominated in the era they competed, what makes anybody think these same individuals would not have evolved with the game, remaining great players?  Johnny Unitas never played against Joe Montana, much less Tom Brady or Patrick Mahomes.  Making this debate even more ridiculous is the idea that since Mahomes’ Chiefs lost, he’s out of the conversation.  Never mind that he has played in four of the last five Super Bowls, five in all, and been on the winning side in three of them.  Pay no attention to the fact he is 29 years old.  Forget Brady played until he was 46, meaning common sense would suggest Mr. Mahomes may not be finished.

When the topic is sports, these debates are largely harmless.  The same cannot be said when the subject is history itself.  Too often, it seems that we behave as though history did not commence until the onset of high-speed internet.  We need a balanced approach to our history versus competing political agendas insisting we look at everything through the prism of their ideologically driven narrative.  Go into a high school and ask the seniors whether they prefer Plato to Socrates.  Get their opinions on Shakespeare.  How can there even be a debate on the greatest author of all time when you are lucky if they think of Shakespeare as being anything other than a fishing rod?

There is a sort of arrogance in assuming that it is always the case that today is superior to yesterday while being inferior to tomorrow.  It is true the path for technology has consistently been one where things improve moving forward.  That has nothing to do with discussing who was our greatest President.  Was it George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, or Ronald Reagan?  My answer it is all of them.  Each of them was the GOAT for the era they served.  After all, that’s all they could have ever been.  

Last year, as Joe Biden was making his clumsy exit from the Presidential race, we heard supposedly serious people saying he belonged on Mount Rushmore (looking at you, Nancy Pelosi).  This is only mentioned to highlight there is a price to be paid for being ignorant of history and/or using it for strictly partisan political purposes.

It is time to end these silly debates about who is the GOAT in sports, literature, politics, or any other topic you choose. Those discussions should be replaced with an adult conversation as to what are the contours that define any given era and who were the important people in that specific era.  Remember this:  Understanding greatness always entails an understanding and appreciation of the historical setting in which it took place.  What do you think?