Topic: Brady injury bad for the league?
Any time one of the league’s best players gets knocked out for the season, it’s bad for the league. As a “football fan”, not just a fan of a particular team, but a fan of football, you should enjoy seeing the very best your era has to offer.
This season will now be similar to the ’94 NBA season when the Houston Rockets won the title in a league missing its best player. They say to be the best you must beat the best, well the Rockets never did that and history remembers that about their accomplishment. It’s the same thing this year. Even if the Jets or Bills win the AFC East this year, it’s an “empty” accomplishment. They, like every NFL team competing for the SB, won’t have an opportunity to beat the best. That’s bad for the league and bad for the game. But look at the silver lining. While we may not end up with a “true” champion this season, it should still remain a very compelling season.
It’s also similar to when Montana got injured. Fans of that era were denied the opportunity to see arguably the greatest QB ever. His last injury knocked him out for what, two or three seasons right at the tail end of his prime. While perhaps good for his division rivals and Steve Young, it was bad for the game.
Injuries are part of the game. The comparison with Jordan sitting out was different because we could imagine him still competing. There was no injury, no reason in the mind of the fans why he couldn’t or wouldn’t come back and play. The “true champion” you seek is the team that overcomes all obstacles (injuries included) and win the Super Bowl. Is the Giants Super Bowl Championship of 1986 an empty accomplishment because Montana (in your words “arguably the greatest QB ever”) was out for the season with a back injury? No, it was accomplishment for the Giants and ultimately failure for the 49ers (that season) who could not overcome Montana’s injury.