Who's more impressive?

PA-PLAYA

Roger Federer, or Tom Brady?

Huge Federer fan. Just won his 20th grand slam title at the Australian this weekend, at 36 years of age.

To say that it's impressive just doesn't suffice. This guy just seems to get better with age.

Best-ever in men's tennis? I don't think there's any question.

Considering the likes of McEnroe, Agassi, Sampras, Nadal.... he's still simply in a league all to his own.

sdandrea1

From what I heard in an interview with John Feinstein, Federer's peers consider him at another level - beyond belief sometimes.

PA-PLAYA

sdandrea1

He just seems to defy age. What he's accomplished in tennis, and sports in general, is incredibly amazing.

Martee

Federer individual sport vs Brady team sport, no competition in my mind, Federer.

Sneakylong

Are we talking longevity or most accomplished? I would argue the most accomplished athlete was Bill Russell (Boston Celtics). He won 11 championships in 13 years. The Celtics with him won every championship in the 1960's (except for 1967). And he won as player / coach of the Celtics in 1969. The best athlete ever is always a very subjected argument. I guess it comes down to which criteria you want to use.

Winning 11 championships in 13 years is something that will be very hard to top.

PA-PLAYA

Sneakylong

I think, as an athlete, we're talking the best of both worlds.... longevity and most accomplished.

And I understand the differences between team sports and individual sports. I also understand the competitive differences and styles of play in comparable eras. And that should not negatively impact Brady's career, from that standpoint. And I also recognize the differences between those things.

That said, I still think what Federer has accomplished, with 20 grand-slam titles, goes above and beyond anything that anyone else has achieved in sports overall.

This guy was on the brink of retirement just a season or two ago, and dug deep for one more run. And who knows how long his current run will last... I just think winning 20 grand-slam titles, at the very least, puts him on a very elite list of maybe a handful-at-best of athletes who've remained relevant for as long as he has.

I'd argue that he is perhaps the most accomplished athlete of my lifetime, if not all-time.

ZWExton

The athletic load on the body to play competitive tennis is far above the athletic load to play QB.

I don't know that TB's 40yd dash time is - I am not 100% sure he can actually dash 40yd in any amount of time.

I think Federer winning major individual tennis championships at age 35 is far more impressive from an athletic perspective than TB playing QB at the highest level at age 40. The constant load on the ankles/knees/hips over 2-4 hrs per match (and many days in a row) against much younger, fresher bodies seems insurmountable, but there he is.

Whether it's more impressive overall - I don't know. Doesn't seem worth trying to iron out. They're both amazing stories of will, endurance, and longevity. I am content with that.

PA-PLAYA

ZWExton

I played recreational/college tennis for a few years back in the early-90's. And although I was never an "athlete" (or a great tennis player for that matter) - I was undoubtedly in the best physical condition of my life. Yet those 2-3 years took an enormous toll on my serving shoulder and knees.

I couldn't imagine the amount of stress on the shoulders/knees that would be required to compete at such an elite level for 20 years.

I think the bodily stress and overall physical toll is much greater than most people could possibly imagine.

letthebigdogshunt

Federer has had a phenomenal career, but he also hasn't had 300 lb lineman sacking him or linebackers smashing into him while he is in the middle of a pass. There is no comparison between the two simply because of the difference of what each has done and under the conditions that they played. Roger may be the greatest tennis player of all time and that is saying a lot considering all that came before him.

Sneakylong

Hard to compare team sports to individual sports. Brady's had only one Hall of Famer in Randy Moss and only for a short time. He's made stars out of very average receivers. I think Federer and Tiger is a better comparison.

ode

Too hard to compare but both could be considered GOAT in there respective sports and their prime being in similar era. Roger has it all, serve, ground strokes, volley, super mobile/athletic, and obviously durable. I think the only intangible Brady lacks is mobility, but that makes his accomplishments that much more impressive. I consider them both to be similar personality wise and if Brady didn't play for New England would be beloved ad much as Roger.