Who is the biggest name/team to never win "the big one"?

[JPanare89]

For me it's my favorite athlete as a kid...Ken Griffey Jr.  I honestly feel like in the mid-90s, Ken Griffey Jr was as big of a deal as Michael Jordan.  He had it all...the swing, the stats, cool, amazing catches in centerfield.  Griffey was the best.  It's a shame he never had a World Series moment.

[VerbalPuke]

Barry Sanders.

[Stevie B]

Tim Henman not winning Wimbledon.

[Adam]

Tim Henman's career achievements (or lack thereof) sit exactly where I think his ability deserve. Was never quite the true Great Hope that everyone in Britain willed him to be. A decent player who earned a spot in the top 5 of the world on merit but didn't even make a Slam final and that says it all for me.

[CobraKaiEnTai]

10 hours ago, Meacon said:

Dan Marino instantly came to mind when I saw this thread title. He only went to one Super Bowl, and it was in his second (I believe) year. 

In basketball I can recall guys like Karl Malone and Patrick Ewing never getting a ring.

In baseball, Don Mattingly is the greatest Yankee to never win a championship.

 

Well maybe if he would've gotten rid of those sideburns.

[Twist]

Allen Iverson, Steve Nash, Pistol Pete.

[stokeriño]

I suppose I would be remiss not to bring up those countries that have never won a World Cup despite having some phenomenal teams at times (Netherlands, for example).

[VerbalPuke]

Actually, how about the Sacramento Kings that had the misfortune of being around during the Laker dynasty. They had a really good team.

[MDK]

2 hours ago, stokeriño said:

I suppose I would be remiss not to bring up those countries that have never won a World Cup despite having some phenomenal teams at times (Netherlands, for example).

They won a Euro's though. A better example would be Hungary. 

[Matt]

Probably not the best example but worth a mention: the golden generation - England 02-06. They were probably never the best side in the world, but on paper they were up there and never even got close.

 

Also pretty much any top English cricketer from 87 to 05 (I think)... Some great players in that time: Gough, Stewart, Atherton etc... Never won an Ashes, quite amazing really; probably a testament to how good the convicts were in the 90s that we didn't win a single series even on home soil... And we didn't have a *bad* team by any means.

[Benji]

7 hours ago, Matt said:

Probably not the best example but worth a mention: the golden generation - England 02-06. They were probably never the best side in the world, but on paper they were up there and never even got close.

I always considered the 96/98 sides better to be honest. England hasn't had a strike force with that much depth in years. Shearer, Cole, Sheringham, Fowler, Ferdinand, Owen and others I am almost certainly forgetting.

[Adam]

The spread of talent in that 02-06 team was phenomenal when you look back at it. We didn't really have a problem position, the whole squad was stacked so it is a crime that we didn't even make the Semi Finals of a major tournament.

[MDK]

37 minutes ago, Adam said:

The spread of talent in that 02-06 team was phenomenal when you look back at it. We didn't really have a problem position, the whole squad was stacked so it is a crime that we didn't even make the Semi Finals of a major tournament.

After Seaman 'keeper position was a bit dodgy though. And the metatarsal position was a pain. 

[FestiveJack]

1 hour ago, Adam said:

The spread of talent in that 02-06 team was phenomenal when you look back at it. We didn't really have a problem position, the whole squad was stacked so it is a crime that we didn't even make the Semi Finals of a major tournament.

Left mid?

[Adam]

6 minutes ago, MadJack said:

Left mid?

Arguably, but that's the only one. Compare that to now where I'd say every single spot in the team bar the striker (Kane) and maybe the #10 role (Alli) are far from certain.

[MDK]

2 hours ago, Adam said:

Arguably, but that's the only one. Compare that to now where I'd say every single spot in the team bar the striker (Kane) and maybe the #10 role (Alli) are far from certain.

I think we are good for fullbacks. Rose, Walker, Tripper and Bertrand are all quality.

[Matt]

The thing was we had depth in most positions.

Seaman/Martyn/James/Robinson

Cole/Bridge/Neville

Campbell/Ferdinand/Terry/Woodgate/King

Neville/Mills

Gerrard/Lampard/Scholes/Hargreaves/Butt

Owen/Fowler/Rooney

Probably more I'm forgetting.

[Adam]

Heskey!

[Bobfoc]

On 18/10/2017 at 03:05, Adam said:

Tim Henman's career achievements (or lack thereof) sit exactly where I think his ability deserve. Was never quite the true Great Hope that everyone in Britain willed him to be. A decent player who earned a spot in the top 5 of the world on merit but didn't even make a Slam final and that says it all for me.

I think he overachieved brilliantly in his career. As a junior, he was never the top British hope, and he didn't have the natural talent of Greg Rusedski, or even the likes of Martin Lee and Arvind Parmar. The fact that he then went on to spend most of a decade in the top 10 and reach six Grand Slam semi-finals, putting his achievements far above players who I felt were more able than him, is remarkable and really should be celebrated more than it has been.

He paid the price for being the top British player at a time when the country hadn't seen a Grand Slam winner in decades and in front of an audience whose majority only pays attention to the home Grand Slam. Every year, the tabloids would hype him to the moon before Wimbledon started, only to write a hatchet job on him when he lost to the eventual winner. If you want a textbook example of cynical media opportunism in sport, the treatment of Tim Henman was just that.

[MDK]

53 minutes ago, Adam said:

Heskey!

And Vasell