In 2000, LL Cool J released his album titled G.O.A.T. 26 years later, the term has become a mainstay in sports debates across every social media platform. Well fans unanimously agree about what the acronym stands for (Greatest Of All Time), there is no agreement about which athletes in each sport embody the meaning. Among the number of athletes who are debated, there is an infinite number of criteria that people use to justify their choice.

Who has the most points, goals, touchdowns, or home runs? Who has made the most All-Star teams, or made the most all league teams? Who played in the most difficult era, and the most ludicrous argument of all, who won the most championships?

Rings Don’t Matter

Wins, losses, and ultimately championships can be a great measurement for the greatness of an athlete in an individual sport like golf, tennis, or bowling. Those things carry less value in team sports. While it’s true that a rising tide lifts all ships, and one great player can raise the level of any team, there is no one player in a team sport who wins games without the help of their teammates.

In sports that feature fewer participants on the playing surface at once, an individual can have a bigger impact. A player like Michael Jordan or LeBron James can single-handedly transform the quality of a team, since they make up 20% of the team on the court at one time. They can’t do it on their own, however, and this is evident in the success each player had after adding all-star teammates.

Fans will incorrectly point to Jordan’s six rings as a symbol of why he is the greatest, and James’ supporters point to his 10 conference championships. Both groups spend so much time arguing with each other on these points that they ignore the fact that Bill Russell won more conference championships than James and more NBA titles than Jordan. Using their logic, shouldn’t both parties see Russell as the G.O.A.T?

In sports like football, where a team has 24 starters on the low end, and where each position has a specific task, the debate is more about a players temmates than the player themselves. In basketball, every player on the floor does the same thing. They all dribble; they all pass, shoot, and rebound. They all play defense. In football, only one player throws the ball, one catches it, one runs it, one kicks it, one punts it, and a whole other group of players tries to stop them.

The roles of each player are so specific and so defined that it’s impossible to have one “Greatest” amongst them all, so the debate becomes, “Who is the greatest at each position?” When arguing over each position, instead of focusing on what the player did, the argument becomes who helped them do it. When determining the best running back, the offensive line has to be considered. And the lack of importance of rings is evident in every debate, except quarterback.

Nobody discusses rings when comparing Barry Sanders to Emmitt Smith, or Jerry Rice to Randy Moss. These were arguably the best players on their teams, and yet their success in winning championships is attributed to the guy under center. If rings matter, then why isn’t Tom Brady universally considered the greatest quarterback of all time? He has nearly double the rings of the next best quarterback. It’s funny how little rings matter when a player’s ultimate team achievement doesn’t support a person’s argument.

Baseball fans must be more sophisticated, because when discussing their sport’s G.O.A.T., a baseball fan will never resort to rings. Most of them don’t know who has the most rings, unlike their basketball counterparts, who can quote ring stats off the top of their heads. Baseball fans will argue only three things when discussing the best to ever do it on a diamond. Stats/achievements, steroids, and eras.

Era Doesn’t Matter Either

It has been said that there is a 16-year-old kid in the Dominican Republic who is a better player than Babe Ruth. This sentiment is correct and is the exact reason a player’s era should not be taken into consideration. Ruth played in a segregated league, where pitchers threw 88 miles per hour, had only three pitches, and had to throw every inning of the game unless they got hurt or were getting shelled.

Despite the evolution of the modern athlete, most baseball fans consider Ruth in the top three of players of all time, in the absolute worst case scenario. Basketball fans aren’t as dismissive of a player’s era. They can’t look at how a person’s stats compare to their contemporaries and be wowed, like baseball fans are about Ruth. They will refer to players from eras gone by as plumbers, or older fans will refer to modern players as soft, entitled babies.

Basketball fans like to play The If Game, which usually involves a time machine that would prove something outrageous. For example, “If Bam Adebayo played in the 1960’s, he’d average 60 points per game.” They will discredit someone like Wilt Chamberlain (who is arguably the greatest athlete ever in any sport), by saying he was playing against guys who were six inches shorter than him. This is false, of course, since the average height of a center in 1965 was the same height as in 2026.

Someone might also argue that if Tom Brady played in an era where it was legal to clostheline and pile drive quarterbacks, he would not have won a single title. The genius of these arguments is that they can’t be proven wrong. The stupidity in them is that they can’t be proven right either. The best argument for someone saying “if” is to give them the most absurd “if” statement possible. “If Mugsey Bogues played in today’s NBA, he’d average 30 points per game.” They may disagree, but they can’t prove the statement isn’t true.

Every G.O.A.T. Argument Is Right, And They Are All Wrong

The reality of these arguments is found in the first letter. G is for greatest, and the term greatest, by definition, is not a factual word. Is a subjective word. Greatness is in the eye of the beholder, which means every person who says LeBron James is the greatest is correct, so there is no point in arguing with them. Everyone who says Jordan is the greatest is also correct. Just as correct as the James defenders. Everyone who says Shohei Ohtani is better than Babe Ruth is correct, and everyone who says the opposite is right.

Everyone is right, because every player is the G.O.A.T. By definition, if everyone is great, then nobody is great, which means there is no actual G.O.A.T. The Greatest of All-Time is a matter of opinion, and opinions can’t be wrong. Statistics can’t be used to disprove any statement, because statistics can be used to support every opinion if they are cherry-picked to do so. Before engaging in a debate with an internet troll, just remember, it’s possible to disagree with them, even though they aren’t wrong.