This is a stupid question. Yes, great is better than ordinary, any debate against that is ridiculous. The only discussion worth having here is what defines a great man, which is an incredibly subjective thing that if you asked 100 people you'd get 100 different answers. A great man that is agreed upon by the masses as being great is superior, but defining that is extremely difficult.
Great men and ordinary men are usually the same thing, so it is harder to say which is better because it is the same thing. A great man rises from being an ordinary man, usually due to something that happened in life, or given the circumstance he happened to stumble upon.
Circumstances is what decides how great the man is, you cannot just be born into it and people assume you will be great. A leader may turn his back when there is a child stuck in a burning building, but the ordinary man might see this and rush in. No one is born great, we are all ordinary people.
No one is born great. People become great by their deeds. It the ordinary men who become great after doing extraordinary things.There are no extraordinary men, just extraordinary circumstances that ordinary men are forced to deal with. Success comes with big ideas, so anybody rich or poor, young or old, ordinary or extraordinary can apply their ideas and bring about a mass change.