Mcenroe : Nadal may actually be the GOAT

McEnroe: Nadal Could Be Greatest of All Time

May 20th, 2013 8:46 pm
In this Golden Age of men’s tennis, there are not one, but two players who could conceivably be considered the Greatest of All Time.

Roger Federer, winner of a men’s record 17 Grand Slam singles championships, is considered by many to be the GOAT.

But Rafael Nadal is charging hard on Federer’s heels, if he hasn’t already surpassed him.

After dominating and embarrassing Federer, 6-1, 6-3, Sunday to win the title in Rome, Nadal has now won 20 of 30 career matches with his Swiss rival.

Nadal will enter next week’s French Open as the overwhelming favorite to win his eighth title at Roland Garros and his 12th career Major.

“It’s good for tennis because clearly we need Nadal because he’s one of the greatest players that ever lived, no doubt about it,” seven-time Major winner John McEnroe said Monday on a conference call set up by The Tennis Channel. “You could make the argument that he is the greatest player that ever lived.”

Like Federer, Nadal owns a career Grand Slam, with seven of his 11 titles coming at Roland Garros.

At 26, Nadal seems much more likely to add to his career total than the 31-year-old Federer.

Still, McEnroe and Cliff Drysdale, among others, believe Federer can win another Major.

“I think his best bet, as I’ve said for years, is Wimbledon,” McEnroe said of Federer, who won his 17th Major there last summer.

As dominant as Federer’s career has been, can you really call someone the GOAT when he has a losing record — by a 2-to-1 margin — against his chief rival?

Pete Sampras, by contrast, never won the French Open, but went 20-14 against his chief nemesis, Andre Agassi.

Nadal’s title in Rome was the Spaniard’s sixth since returning earlier this year from a seven-month layoff due to a left knee injury.

“I’m playing much better than I dreamed of a few months ago,” Nadal said. “I’m doing the right things to play well.”

Federer complimented Nadal for the way he took his time before returning to the circuit.

“It goes to show that’s what every player should do,” Federer said. “Now he’s as strong as ever and is going to be the favorite for Roland Garros.”

You can say that again.

It’s hard to imagine anyone beating Nadal at Roland Garros, where he has won every match he has played except once since 2005.

“I’m really happy for him and impressed that he’s come back,” McEnroe said. “It seems like he’s barely lost anything, if at all. Right now…he says he’s playing the best he’s been playing the whole year, which is sort of frightening for the other players.”

Top-ranked Novak Djokovic might have the best shot to take out Nadal, but he has been bothered by an ankle injury suffered in a Davis Cup match last week.

“Djokovic, I’m not quite sure what his ankle situation is,” McEnroe said. “So it’s a little bit up in the air.”

McEnroe said it remains “possible” that some heavy hitter could oust Nadal from the French Open, the way Robin Soderling did in the fourth round of in 2009, enabling Federer to go on and win his only title there.

“It’s possible he might be caught off guard in a match, but it’s unlikely that someone can still beat him in a best-of five,” McEnroe said of Nadal.

“The big hitters that presumably would try to swing for the fences would have the best shot I would think of possibly upsetting him. When it gets down to the latter parts of the tournament, even guys like [Tomas] Berdych, [Juan Martin] Del Potro, the big hitters, I would be hard-pressed to see them certainly going all the way and having the wherewithal to beat Rafa three sets.

“Maybe one, possibly two, but to beat him three sets is unbelievably hard.”

(The AP contributed reporting)

Follow Adam Zagoria on Twitter
 
No, just no. And JMac is such a bandwagoner it's not even funny. Wait and see how fast he jumps back on the Cvac bandwagon after he wins RG.
 
J Mac has become a bit of a loser in his old age. However, I suppose he's just doing his job by promoting hype.

It won't be long before he declares Novak as GOAT.

No, just no. And JMac is such a bandwagoner it's not even funny. Wait and see how fast he jumps back on the Cvac bandwagon after he wins RG.

Beat me to it.
 
Nadal IMO needs 2 more Wimbledons and 2 more hard court slams to even be considered as possible GOAT no matter how many more French Opens he wins.
 
It certainly is fun to speculate on how many slams Nadal would have if there were two CLAY slams per year instead of two HC per year. The slam counts would probably be reversed in that case.

However, as it stands, Fed was/is the best on HC and Grass, while Nadal is the best on only Clay - slam counts be darned. Owning 2 surfaces and being second best on the third > owning 1 surface and being "ok" on the other two.
 
Rofl,, in the span of three matches you can hear mac wax rhapsodic about federer, then glordy nadal and then hail djoker as the second coming, lmao.

Its the FO and this journo writes an article praising Nadal, shocking.

Roflmao@ the journo excusing pete's deficiency on clay because of h2h with andre


Roflmaoooooooooo
 
Last edited:
It certainly is fun to speculate on how many slams Nadal would have if there were two CLAY slams per year instead of two HC per year. The slam counts would probably be reversed in that case.

However, as it stands, Fed was/is the best on HC and Grass, while Nadal is the best on only Clay - slam counts be darned. Owning 2 surfaces and being second best on the third > owning 1 surface and being "ok" on the other two.

Very good point. That is something I've never heard anyone talk about.
 
McEnroe: Nadal Could Be Greatest of All Time

May 20th, 2013 8:46 pm
In this Golden Age of men’s tennis, there are not one, but two players who could conceivably be considered the Greatest of All Time.

Roger Federer, winner of a men’s record 17 Grand Slam singles championships, is considered by many to be the GOAT.

But Rafael Nadal is charging hard on Federer’s heels, if he hasn’t already surpassed him.

After dominating and embarrassing Federer, 6-1, 6-3, Sunday to win the title in Rome, Nadal has now won 20 of 30 career matches with his Swiss rival.

Nadal will enter next week’s French Open as the overwhelming favorite to win his eighth title at Roland Garros and his 12th career Major.

“It’s good for tennis because clearly we need Nadal because he’s one of the greatest players that ever lived, no doubt about it,” seven-time Major winner John McEnroe said Monday on a conference call set up by The Tennis Channel. “You could make the argument that he is the greatest player that ever lived.”

Like Federer, Nadal owns a career Grand Slam, with seven of his 11 titles coming at Roland Garros.

At 26, Nadal seems much more likely to add to his career total than the 31-year-old Federer.

Still, McEnroe and Cliff Drysdale, among others, believe Federer can win another Major.

“I think his best bet, as I’ve said for years, is Wimbledon,” McEnroe said of Federer, who won his 17th Major there last summer.

As dominant as Federer’s career has been, can you really call someone the GOAT when he has a losing record — by a 2-to-1 margin — against his chief rival?

Pete Sampras, by contrast, never won the French Open, but went 20-14 against his chief nemesis, Andre Agassi.

Nadal’s title in Rome was the Spaniard’s sixth since returning earlier this year from a seven-month layoff due to a left knee injury.

“I’m playing much better than I dreamed of a few months ago,” Nadal said. “I’m doing the right things to play well.”

Federer complimented Nadal for the way he took his time before returning to the circuit.

“It goes to show that’s what every player should do,” Federer said. “Now he’s as strong as ever and is going to be the favorite for Roland Garros.”

You can say that again.

It’s hard to imagine anyone beating Nadal at Roland Garros, where he has won every match he has played except once since 2005.

“I’m really happy for him and impressed that he’s come back,” McEnroe said. “It seems like he’s barely lost anything, if at all. Right now…he says he’s playing the best he’s been playing the whole year, which is sort of frightening for the other players.”

Top-ranked Novak Djokovic might have the best shot to take out Nadal, but he has been bothered by an ankle injury suffered in a Davis Cup match last week.

“Djokovic, I’m not quite sure what his ankle situation is,” McEnroe said. “So it’s a little bit up in the air.”

McEnroe said it remains “possible” that some heavy hitter could oust Nadal from the French Open, the way Robin Soderling did in the fourth round of in 2009, enabling Federer to go on and win his only title there.

“It’s possible he might be caught off guard in a match, but it’s unlikely that someone can still beat him in a best-of five,” McEnroe said of Nadal.

“The big hitters that presumably would try to swing for the fences would have the best shot I would think of possibly upsetting him. When it gets down to the latter parts of the tournament, even guys like [Tomas] Berdych, [Juan Martin] Del Potro, the big hitters, I would be hard-pressed to see them certainly going all the way and having the wherewithal to beat Rafa three sets.

“Maybe one, possibly two, but to beat him three sets is unbelievably hard.”

(The AP contributed reporting)

Follow Adam Zagoria on Twitter

So much for the Federer fringe using McEnroe to pump Federer's record. He's not the only one to switch positions, so whether one looks at the history Federer could not make, or anything else, he's no GOAT.

I agree with McEnroe that Federer could win another Wimbledon title. That's where he should retire, whenever that happens.
 
Not necessarily. Nadal and Toni knew the distribution of the tour when they molded his game at a young age.

Yes there were lots of things to take into consideration. The first being his innate abilities, and where he was born. His hometown idol, his family ties and so on.
 
It certainly is fun to speculate on how many slams Nadal would have if there were two CLAY slams per year instead of two HC per year. The slam counts would probably be reversed in that case.

Assuming Federer and Nadal kept their respective games, sure. But in that environment, both Federer and Nadal - and all the other players on tour - would have developed their games differently. It's impossible to say what would have happened.
 
It certainly is fun to speculate on how many slams Nadal would have if there were two CLAY slams per year instead of two HC per year. The slam counts would probably be reversed in that case.

.

And what if they had 3 grass courts and 1 clay court like in Laver times? Hmmm I wonder how Federer would have done on such a spread of surfaces.
 
And what if they had 3 grass courts and 1 clay court like in Laver times? Hmmm I wonder how Federer would have done on such a spread of surfaces.

Brisbane: Dry, hard, high-bouncing grass
Roland Garros: Slow clay
Wimbledon: Firm, fast grass
Forest Hills: Damp grass with substandard bounces

Besides, Laver won the biggest tournaments on all surfaces in 1969, including hardcourt, which was a much rarer surface back then.
 
Brisbane: Dry, hard, high-bouncing grass
Roland Garros: Slow clay
Wimbledon: Firm, fast grass
Forest Hills: Damp grass with substandard bounces

Besides, Laver won the biggest tournaments on all surfaces in 1969, including hardcourt, which was a much rarer surface back then.

it was a rhetorical question. :)
 
Brisbane: Dry, hard, high-bouncing grass
Roland Garros: Slow clay
Wimbledon: Firm, fast grass
Forest Hills: Damp grass with substandard bounces

Besides, Laver won the biggest tournaments on all surfaces in 1969, including hardcourt, which was a much rarer surface back then.
Did that become the US Open?
 
This is the same McEnroe, who said today, that Roger is the 3rd member of the "who's tournament is it"? because he would only have to beat 1 of the others, not 2 like Djo or Rafa would do....
 
Did that become the US Open?

Forest Hills in New York City was the location of the US Open (or the US Championships in the pre-open era) from 1915-1920 and 1924-1977, the last 3 years of which were on green clay, and all the other years on grass. In 1978, the US Open moved to a new venue across New York City and on a different surface, Flushing Meadows on hardcourt.
 
If Nadal gets to 15 slams in next four years he ll arguably be the best of all time . I dont see why he couldnt get four more. Djokovic also to get 5 or 6 more bringing his total to 11 or 12.
 
Nadal has to beat Djoker at one of the other slams other than clay. He needs to win a few more big ones in addition to winning the French again to be considered the GOAT.
 
Forest Hills in New York City was the location of the US Open (or the US Championships in the pre-open era) from 1915-1920 and 1924-1977, the last 3 years of which were on green clay, and all the other years on grass. In 1978, the US Open moved to a new venue across New York City and on a different surface, Flushing Meadows on hardcourt.
Thanks for the info. I wish it had stayed grass. But the upkeep and time of year for the GS would have made it prohibitive.
 
Another thread to bash Fed and elevate Rafa above the latter. By. TDK. no. less. Wow.
This time, he had to use Big Mac to convey his Fed-bashing message. LOL.
If I recall correctly, Connor (Jimmy, that is) also said this about Fed, "there are excellent players, and then there's Fed". Of course, Connor's words are gospel, far from it, but if we want to play the game "what other past great players said about Fed, or Rafa", 2 can play that game, right KOT?
LOL.
Have a good trolling now.
 
They're paid to talk, they have to keep taking positions so people take an interest and continue to watch.
Isn't the same JMac that hyped Donald Young?

JMac provides some great insight and color to the game. However, I would take any single statement that he makes with a grain o' salt. Remember that JMac is the last great proponent of using the continental grip for everything (including holding his spoon, brushing his teeth and, possibly, other private acts). Seems like it was just 2-3 years ago when I last heard him suggest this.
 
JMac provides some great insight and color to the game. However, I would take any single statement that he makes with a grain o' salt. Remember that JMac is the last great proponent of using the continental grip for everything (including holding his spoon, brushing his teeth and, possibly, other private acts). Seems like it was just 2-3 years ago when I last heard him suggest this.

It's funny anyone who says Nadal is the greatest or defends him is either insane or has an interest bla bla bla.

Did you ever consider that some people are right in their opinions?

Sampras is wrong , Agassi is wrong , wilander is wrong ....and the list just goes on and on .....and it grows with every day.

The only opinion that is right is that fed is the goat......it's amazing to me.

But guess what just like the kid you realized the emperor was not wearing any clothes.... The world is starting to realize that Fed may not be as great as we all thought he was.
 
Another thread to bash Fed and elevate Rafa above the latter. By. TDK. no. less. Wow.
This time, he had to use Big Mac to convey his Fed-bashing message. LOL.
If I recall correctly, Connor (Jimmy, that is) also said this about Fed, "there are excellent players, and then there's Fed". Of course, Connor's words are gospel, far from it, but if we want to play the game "what other past great players said about Fed, or Rafa", 2 can play that game, right KOT?
LOL.
Have a good trolling now.

Look what am I supposed to do just hide what Jmac said . Shall we just pretend it didn't happen and live in the matrix ?

Wake up not everyone agrees that fed is the goat .....and that's ok !!! It's ok to have differing opinions .
 
Back
Top