Sports | Opinions on the term "World Champions"

Options: add reply
bookmark this topic
track this topic
track this category
start topic
rss

Poll for November 25
"Do you have a favorite author?"
	yes
	no

suggest a poll \| old polls

Opinions on the term "World Champions"


23-11-2008 14:47 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	What is your opinion on American leagues like the MLB (baseball), NHL (hockey), and NBA (basketball) calling their champions "World Champions"? Do you agree that American leagues are superior and that the players are the best athletes the world has to offer? Any other things to back up your thoughts?

Showing posts 1-20 of 20

Page 1 of 1

Reactions
24-11-2008 07:01 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	Those American leagues have, by far, the greatest players playing in those leagues. The talent of American leagues is overwhelmingly better than any other country.. Since American leagues are the premier league in the entire world, and have the best players, it makes sense to call them 'World Champs'. it is the best competition the world has to offer.
28-11-2008 21:56 Rise
566 posts	Those American leagues have, by far, the greatest players playing in those leagues. I think thats the best self-referential argument ever. Well done. The talent of American leagues is overwhelmingly better than any other country.. What do you want, a medal? Try picking a sport the world plays if you want a discussion on this rather than a bite.
28-11-2008 23:31 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	Last time I checked, a lot of the world did play basketball and baseball...So I'm not sure what you're talking about. No medal is needed for me or Americans, but unless you can somehow show me how American leagues DO NOT have the best players, I will disregard you post.
29-11-2008 21:50 musiclover342
1,801 posts	The world plays basketball, soccer, baseball, etc and not to mention alot of the other olympic sports that we see every four years. I think in some aspects, Americans can be classified as world champs. Sure, they have all kinds of ethnicities and they recruit hard core AND worldwide for alot of the teams that they have, and sometimes we seriously just kick major ass. But if we're talking about the olympics, Americans weren't the champs the whole time.
30-11-2008 07:19 fishmunky
22,062 posts	With the exception of team sports like Soccer and Cricket, and individual sports with international circuits like boxing and tennis i think North American leagues with the fact that there is such a focus on international recruitment its fair enough to call the league the world champs. in fact i think its only fair that a multi-ethnic team regardless of where the team is based is fair enough to be called world champions. The North American leagues tend to have the best of these teams. The exposure and money is definitely a draw for players from other nations to play for the boston red sox or the detroit red wings instead of the Tokyo yakult swallows or MODO Hockey as an example, during the holidays Canada sends a team thats largely composed of semi-professionals (as such not playing in the NHL) to switzerland for a tournament composed of the best teams in the european leagues (the spengler cup i believe its called). Canada usually fairs well, and has won the last 2 i believe. and lets be honest if these teams from north america competed against the best teams from the other leagues it wouldn't go well. the NHL has had teams play against european teams during the opneing of the seasons, and the NHL squads are essentially icing practice squads and dominating, the NBA does the the same thing, minus the uber pathetic toronto raptors losing to the tel-aviv team a few years back, it doesnt really happen where a team from outside north america beats a north american squad i know its arrogant to declare the winners of the world series the champs of the world, but often with these teams comsed of players from all walks of life, why is it such a big deal? if the hanshin tigers played the phillies in a 7 game series would it make people happier? in fact almost no other countries play the american version of football, doesnt it technically make the superbowl champion the world champs? i dont know why there's any fuss about american clubs calling themselves world champs, especially with the nba and the nhl, who really just declare themselves champions of their particular leagues, not the world but whatever /rant
13-03-2009 21:50 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	Foreigners love knocking America. They like using the USA as a whipping post, so whenever America is clearly better than their country at something, they have a tough time admitting it... It's not an argument that the best players play in American-based leagues. Most people will agree with that, and those that don't probably don't follow sports. Nobody can give a reason as to why they SHOULDN'T be called world champs... Hmmm, the best players in the world in the best league in the world... Doesn't seem too complicated to me.
14-03-2009 19:58 Metalupurass69
300 posts	alot of MLB players are from the dominican republic and most have allstar talent....so even though they lost to the worst team (netherlands) in the WBC they still are better than the US.
15-03-2009 03:38 PunkRckr8
11,632 posts	metal, you just had a perfect chance to have a valid argument and yet you messed it up horribly
15-03-2009 03:39 Dekar
36,178 posts	I'm not sure how I feel about teams from one regional league calling themselves "world" champions, but I do think that major league baseball's championships being called the "World Series" is a bad name. The World Baseball Classic should be called the world series. In fact, soccer's the only major sport that really has it right in that they have a world championships for national teams (the FIFA World Cup), and a world championships for regional league teams (the FIFA Club World Cup). Check that. NHL hockey doesn't call their teams world champions. They're called Stanley Cup champions, since that's the trophy they play for. Maybe media does on occasion, but it's by far the most common to say Stanley Cup champions. Same as in NFL football where the champs are the Superbowl champions, not the world champions. The NBA does the same too. Come to think of it, isn't this argument really just about baseball's championships being called the "World Series"?
15-03-2009 18:08 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	Pretty much... I've heard world champions used for most North American sports, but most of the time it's just the medie and not the leagues themselves. So i guess it's kind of an argument against the media's portrayal of "world" champions too... Valid point on the WBC...That probably is more suited for the term "World Series." I think that the term World Champions is the greatest honor that a team could be called, on the grandest stage.. If the WBC mattered more than the MLB, then I think it'd be considered a World Series, but it's new and it will never be as important as the MLB season
15-03-2009 18:14 JDolla
9,907 posts	i wouldn't say never.
16-03-2009 01:08 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	It could I guess.... but realistically I just can't see it.. I think it's really cool and definetly gives a lot of people a sense of pride in their heritage or country.. but I don't think any player would take a WBC championship over a World Series victory. A lot of it has to do with money.. and teams put a lot of restrictions on their players if they are selected for the WBC, so it really has a short ceiling as to how good it can be. If an ace pitcher can only throw 60 pitches, it takes away from the game. Plus, the MLB is where the money is at. If the WBC somehow involved more money, I think it'd compete with the World Series, but I don't see the perfect storm of all those things happening.
16-03-2009 01:20 fishmunky
22,062 posts	meh i disagree, as much as i love the Stanley Cup, the Olympics are the pinnacle of hockey. Legit the best players get to play for their nation. as long as the scouting isnt awful and there's no money on the line, just national pride. ou can honestly say the best country in the world at hockey at the time is the one that wins the gold
16-03-2009 23:21 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	Tim is a little off, metal never even came close to a valid argument... but yeah Metal, you could have at least came close.
27-03-2009 22:10 Metalupurass69
300 posts	at least i wasnt biased.....they were the best nation team before this tragic event occured. just look at their team they are stacked with excellence not one sucked. laughed and blew it off maybe, choked maybe. the world series shouldnt be called that. its only in america. and it belittled every other nation out there
30-03-2009 01:45 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	The Dominican has the most talent, and they all play in the MLB, which has the World Series... So 99% of the best players in the world play in the MLB.. All nations have to concede that fact. So how is that belittling other countries? The MLB has all other countries' best players.
30-06-2009 09:01 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	The LA Lakers are World Champs!
30-06-2009 14:51 Captain_Keeta
4,274 posts	All i have to say is, Go Mets!
30-06-2009 14:51 Captain_Keeta
4,274 posts	And/or Yankees!!
02-10-2009 11:52 Bucephalus
3,879 posts	Mets really had no chance with serious injuries to almost every major player. I don't even understand people who make fun of the mets.. there isn't a team out there that could win while missing they're 1, 3, and 4 hitters and 2 of their best 3 pitchers and best setup man. Yanks look strong though this year... Looking at this old thread and the world champions thread which was closed, Im reminded how little people like Daniel and Tim know about sports. Kinda sad they tried arguing but that's their choice. As for the baseball world champions this year.. I think it's gonna be the Cardinals.