Rafael Nadal vs. Novak Djokovic: Tennis Wins If Djokovic Wins Wimbledon 2011

The finals are set. No. 1 Rafael Nadal vs. No 2. Novak Djokovic.

Ideally, you can't ask for better than a No. 1 vs. 2 final, although Nadal vs. Roger Federer would probably have a greater worldwide appeal.

Federer is fading. He may not be done winning Grand Slams, but he is clearly on the back end of his prime. With that, Nadal appears to be well on his way to being a dominant player for years to come.

He needs a new rival. That rival could be Djokovic. Actually, with Federer fading and Andy Murray looking completely overwhelmed, if it's not Djokovic, it may not be anyone.

Tennis is a sport that thrives on great rivalries. If it's not one rivalry, then it needs to be several evenly matched players playing at the same time.

Unless Federer can get back on track and win consistently, there aren't that many evenly matched players at the top. As a matter of fact, Nadal and Djokovic are well ahead of No. 3, and that gap will only continue to grow as Federer gets older.

The question is, how close are No. 1 and No. 2 to each other? Officially, they are close. Actually, officially, Djokovic is the better player. Realistically, Nadal is the top guy.

If Djokovic can find a way to win on Sunday, he challenges that theory. All of a sudden, that No. 1 ranking that he's going to have as soon as Wimbledon ends will make a lot more sense. It would be him, not Nadal, who would have two of 2011's three Grand Slam championships.

All of a sudden, we would be looking at a much more even rivalry going forward.

Now, Djokovic is not likely to ever touch Nadal's career. Currently, the Grand Slam count is 10-2 Nadal. But let's dig a little deeper.

Six of Nadal's 10 have been at the French Open, and Nadal is a clay specialist. If Djokovic wins on Sunday, the non-clay count will be 4-3 Nadal, with each winning one final against the other. All of a sudden, it doesn't look so one-sided, does it?

Of course, there is another way of looking at that. While Nadal has certainly made a name for himself on clay, he's won all of the career Grand Slams. Djokovic on the other hand, has only won the Australian Open.

So, if Nadal were to win, you could eliminate the Australian Opens that both men have won (Djokovic: two; Nadal: one) and the count would be 10-0 with Nadal 2-0 in finals of Grand Slams.

At the very least, the sport of tennis needs a good final at Wimbledon. Actually, that’s really only true if Nadal wins.

If Djokovic wins big, the notion will be that Nadal just had a bad match and that he can get him back at the next Grand Slam. Actually, it might add to the intrigue of future tournaments.

It would also add to the intrigue of future tournaments if Djokovic loses a close match. Remember that John McEnroe lost a close final at Wimbledon in 1980 to Björn Borg, only to have McEnroe beat Bjorn in the US Open final and then again the following year at the Wimbledon and the US Open.

A close Nadal win could create a similar intrigue. But would those matches in 1980 and 1981 have been as intriguing if Borg had blown McEnroe out at the Wimbledon final in 1980? No, not at all.

The future intrigue of the game relies a lot on this match. If Djokovic loses a close match or better, we have the makings of a great rivalry. If Nadal wins in a blowout, we have the makings of a tennis dynasty.