Early games thread

[MichiganCowboyFan]

We don't have to like it, but he's probably right. Not about head and shoulders above the rest, because I don't think there is a big gap between Brady and Rodgers. But I think you can make an argument that Rodgers is the more talented QB. But who cares? The goal is winning. Tampa is actively trying to put the better team on the field while GB is more concerned about who Rodger's replacement will be. Brady's cap hit is 10 million while Rodgers is at 27 million. One of these two are stacking the deck in his favor. That's what matters, and that more often than not is what pays off. So who cares who's better? Who wins?

I'd argue that Adams+Scantling+Cobb+Lazard+St.Brown+Jones+Dillon+DeGuara > Evans+Godwin+Brown+Fournette+Gronk+Brate+Ronald Jones and Kenny Clark > Vita Vea and Alexander+Stokes+Amos+Savage >>>>>> Bucs secondary.

 

[Flamma]

You are like Clint Eastwood in Grand Torino yelling at kids to get off your lawn.

This is not the 70s, and it is not the 90s. Just curious, how many of those Dallas Cowboys Super Bowl teams played under the Salary Cap?
I would love to see the stats on the first 25 super bowl winners that were either 1 or 2 seeds. Then look at the stats and see the % of Super Bowl winners since that are the 1 or 2 seeds.

Do you actually think those numbers would be close? In THIS ERA, not the era where we still milked our cows, it makes no difference where you play and what seed you are. Like I said, the 1 seed gets the bye, AND they showed they were the best team in the reg season..... so they have an advantage. Nobody else does.

Had you said, ":in the last few decades", I wouldn't have bothered to post. But you're the one that brought up since 1977.

 

[Flamma]

I would love to see the stats on the first 25 super bowl winners that were either 1 or 2 seeds. Then look at the stats and see the % of Super Bowl winners since that are the 1 or 2 seeds.

Do you actually think those numbers would be close? In THIS ERA, not the era where we still milked our cows, it makes no difference where you play and what seed you are. Like I said, the 1 seed gets the bye, AND they showed they were the best team in the reg season..... so they have an advantage. Nobody else does.

First of all, up until 1978 there were only 4 teams in each conference that made the playoffs. So of course more first and second seeds are going to win the SB. Back then just the Raiders and Steelers won super bowls not being the 1st or 2nd seed. Since then it's only happened another 9 times. Most in the last 25 years of course.

 

[Reid1boys]

First of all, up until 1978 there were only 4 teams in each conference that made the playoffs. So of course more first and second seeds are going to win the SB. Back then just the Raiders and Steelers won super bowls not being the 1st or 2nd seed. Since then it's only happened another 9 times. Most in the last 25 years of course.

That was my entire point. At one time, a huge deal was made all the time about the Raiders being the only widcard team to ever win a SB. Since then, we dont think twice about it.

 

[Flamma]

That was my entire point. At one time, a huge deal was made all the time about the Raiders being the only widcard team to ever win a SB. Since then, we dont think twice about it.

That is true. And it could just be me, I haven't looked into it, but it seems like home field in general doesn't seem to matter as much as it used to.

I used to gamble a lot on the 80s and early 90s. Home field was always a huge consideration. It would not be if I was still gambling today.

 

[Reid1boys]

That is true. And it could just be me, I haven't looked into it, but it seems like home field in general doesn't seem to matter as much as it used to.

I used to gamble a lot on the 80s and early 90s. Home field was always a huge consideration. It would not be if I was still gambling today.

the salary cap has simply made getting into the playoffs the goal. Once you are there, even if as a wild card, you have almost as good a shot as any team. Look at years 1975-1995 and see how many 1 seeds lost their first game in the playoffs. Then look from 1996 till now, Id guess it is 4 times as many 1 seeds lost since 1996.

 

[Flamma]

the salary cap has simply made getting into the playoffs the goal. Once you are there, even if as a wild card, you have almost as good a shot as any team. Look at years 1975-1995 and see how many 1 seeds lost their first game in the playoffs. Then look from 1996 till now, Id guess it is 4 times as many 1 seeds lost since 1996.

Double the amount. Still, 14 is a lot in 25 years. We even had a little stretch there of 3 or 4 years where 1 seeds were getting to the SB. Which was uncommon.

 

[Reid1boys]

Double the amount. Still, 14 is a lot in 25 years. We even had a little stretch there of 3 or 4 years where 1 seeds were getting to the SB. Which was uncommon.

and like you said, back in the day only 4 teams got in, meaning the number 1 seed was likely playing a tougher opponent back in the 70s.... and they still won most of the time.

Now, the 1 seed could be playing a wildcard team that barely got in.... and still lose.

Bottom line, this NFL is so different than when I grow up that you cant compare ANYTHING from the 2 eras.

Stats in baseball are mostly comparable from the 50s till today. Even though the steroid era really changed the records... but look at passing stats. what are there? that started their careers pre 1990 for passing yards and tds out of the top 15 or so? Matt Ryan is better than Joe Montana on in every way if you look at stats alone.