Back in March, ESPN did the "greatest athletes of all time" tournament, and Bo Jackson beat Roger Federer. I've seen a lot of disagreement on the Internet about that, so do you think that was the right choice? A lot of people say Bo never accomplished anything, but I think they give Federer too much credit on merit.
I choose Bo.
I've seen the Thirty for Thirty. Don't get me wrong, I think Bo was a freak of nature. But a lot of people thought Federer should have won, I dont know why.
I choose Bo.
I've seen the Thirty for Thirty. Don't get me wrong, I think Bo was a freak of nature. But a lot of people thought Federer should have won, I dont know why.