Fact: Parity now reigns in the NFL

[dcfanatic]

MEDIOCRITY, not parity, rules the NFL.

And the NFL is at is apex in making money...popularity. - What other sports league in the world thrives on mediocrity???

NFL fans are idiots to take this from the owners. Then again, most of them are too drunk during the game to notice the difference.

I don't buy that 100%.

You can't tell me the athletes from 1984 can beat the athletes of today.

But on the other hand I buy it a little because maybe there are too many teams and that spreads the talent base out too much.

 

[dcfanatic]

Powerhouse teams and franchises are far better for the NFL than average teams getting hot or luck (pitt, nyg, ariz) going to the super bowl will ever be.

The NFL is by far the most popular sport right now over MLB, NBA and NHL.

Every year the fans of teams that were 5-11 in the previous year now have hope that in one season it can all be turned around.

That means more fans will be interested across the board.

 

[DallasEast]

you guys should thank parity. b'c of parity, the cowboy's chance of winning the superbowl next season is as good as any team's.

Otherwise, the patriots should be the dominating team of this decade and will probably be on their way to winning their nth superbowl. And fans of every other team (including the cowboys) would be calling for parity.

I may be wrong, so I apologize, but you must be young. It seems like you're basing your opinion on 1994 - present NFL football and how teams have been built.

There's a distinct difference in NFL football from today and 20, 30 or more years ago, with the major impact being that assembled powerhouse teams KEPT their star players. The more star players = the more dominating core of that powerhouse team wielded.

The New England Patriots are a "dynasty" by today's standards. They have super solid coaching and a handful (if that) of star players surrounded by an ever changing, well-oiled group of good-to-average players. That's the medium best which the 21st NFL has had to offer.

hoorah. this is what i have to be thankful for? not likely.

 

[Kangaroo]

I may be wrong, so I apologize, but you must be young. It seems like you're basing your opinion on 1994 - present NFL football and how teams have been built.

There's a distinct difference in NFL football from today and 20, 30 or more years ago, with the major impact being that assembled powerhouse teams KEPT their star players. The more star players = the more dominating core of that powerhouse team wielded.

The New England Patriots are a "dynasty" by today's standards. They have super solid coaching and a handful (if that) of star players surrounded by an ever changing, well-oiled group of good-to-average players. That's the medium best which the 21st NFL has had to offer.

hoorah. this is what i have to be thankful for? not likely.

Well that is what happens when the money generated is so freakin much and salaries get out of whack and all that stuff. Then add in free Agents and we have mercenaries and nothing less. Look I do not blame the player for taking the money and running it is a lot of money but it is what it is.

Today's NFL is a mercenary game and as long as FA exist in any form you will always have what we have today. Get use to that fact it is not going away anytime soon.

 

[Manster68]

The Cardinals getting into the Super Bowl just gives me hope for 2009 because it proves to me that there are no 'great teams' in the NFC.

The Cards have a few things they do well, but they aren't a team that wins 9, or 8, or 7, or even 6 out of every 10 games against the rest of the NFC playoff field.

If anything they would win 5 and lose 5.

And I am not knocking them because they manned up and got the job done when it counted the most so they get all the credit in the world.

But it seems the days of having terms like 'the 80's 49ers' or 'the 90's Cowboys' are gone.

Parity now reigns in the NFL and I guess it's good for the game.

I have news for you. There has not been a Super Bowl worthy team in well over a decade.

It took over five years for salary cap, free agency, and expansion to weaken the NFC powers of the Cowboys, 49ers, and Packers in order for Denver to to break through and end the run of NFC dominance in the big game.

The Packers couldn't win until the 49ers and Cowboys weaken.

The 49ers couldn't win until Dallas had over 20 players removed from their 1992 roster - and on top of that, they also had to cheat and count on a plehtora of injuries in order to get by in 1994.

The games have been wild in the last dozen years or so because the overall quality dispersed throughout the NFL has really plummeted.

The only way the NFL can get out of it is to decrease the amount of teams to 16 and increase the talent level. That will never happen though.

So we are stuck watching guys like Donovan McNabb be regarded as a God when 15-20 years earlier he probably would have never made a roster.

 

[ReturnToGlory]

So we are stuck watching guys like Donovan McNabb be regarded as a God when 15-20 years earlier he probably would have never made a roster.

Good points. But McNabb would have been a serviceable back up.

 

[DallasEast]

Well that is what happens when the money generated is so freakin much and salaries get out of whack and all that stuff. Then add in free Agents and we have mercenaries and nothing less. Look I do not blame the player for taking the money and running it is a lot of money but it is what it is.

Today's NFL is a mercenary game and as long as FA exist in any form you will always have what we have today. Get use to that fact it is not going away anytime soon.

True, I have to accept it, but that doesn't mean I can't see it for what it really is either. And know that I say that while agreeing with every single word of your description about today's NFL.

 

[DallasEast]

I have news for you. There has not been a Super Bowl worthy team in well over a decade.

It took over five years for salary cap, free agency, and expansion to weaken the NFC powers of the Cowboys, 49ers, and Packers in order for Denver to to break through and end the run of NFC dominance in the big game.

The Packers couldn't win until the 49ers and Cowboys weaken.

The 49ers couldn't win until Dallas had over 20 players removed from their 1992 roster - and on top of that, they also had to cheat and count on a plehtora of injuries in order to get by in 1994.

The games have been wild in the last dozen years or so because the overall quality dispersed throughout the NFL has really plummeted.

The only way the NFL can get out of it is to decrease the amount of teams to 16 and increase the talent level. That will never happen though.

So we are stuck watching guys like Donovan McNabb be regarded as a God when 15-20 years earlier he probably would have never made a roster.

:signmast:

 

[Gumby74]

Free agency allows the smaller market teams to compete on equal footing with the large market ones. That's a good thing no?

Who wants the NFL to turn into baseball where the Yankees and Redsox are single handedly destroying it by spending more money then everyone else.

The only dominant team of the free agency era has been New England and perhaps Indiannapolis. And they've done it through the strength of their front office, coaching staff, and management.

More responsibility has been shifted onto scouting and drafting well instead of spending $$$ and just getting the biggest name available. That's the way it should be.

Although it does suck for the hardcore fan to have to buy a different jersey every few years because there is no sense of team loyalty.

 

[Future]

The NFL is by far the most popular sport right now over MLB, NBA and NHL.

Every year the fans of teams that were 5-11 in the previous year now have hope that in one season it can all be turned around.

That means more fans will be interested across the board.

True, but you lose casual fans when teams like Arizona are playing in the Super Bowl. Teams still don't get great attendance when they aren't winning, regardless of last year. But in order to attract casual fans to games, you need big teams.

Arizona vs. Baltimore wouldn't draw nearly as many spectators as Dallas vs. Pittsburgh

 

[Gumby74]

True, but you lose casual fans when teams like Arizona are playing in the Super Bowl. Teams still don't get great attendance when they aren't winning, regardless of last year. But in order to attract casual fans to games, you need big teams.

Arizona vs. Baltimore wouldn't draw nearly as many spectators as Dallas vs. Pittsburgh

You're talking about one game. How about during the course of an entire season. If half the teams in the NFL know that they have no shot going in, how many fans in each respective city are actually going to want to follow the NFL at all?

 

[wileedog]

You're talking about one game. How about during the course of an entire season. If half the teams in the NFL know that they have no shot going in, how many fans in each respective city are actually going to want to follow the NFL at all?

Exactly. That Cardinals stadium yesterday was as full and rocking as it has ever been in the teams history. SB aside, the Cardinals made a lot of money and certainly some new fans by "sneaking" into the title game this year.

That's what the parity plan is about. Next year it might be the Bengals who have the hottest ticket in football come January.

 

[Kangaroo]

True, I have to accept it, but that doesn't mean I can't see it for what it really is either. And know that I say that while agreeing with every single word of your description about today's NFL.

I am not disagreeing with that stance buy any means.

 

[adbutcher]

I have news for you. There has not been a Super Bowl worthy team in well over a decade.

It took over five years for salary cap, free agency, and expansion to weaken the NFC powers of the Cowboys, 49ers, and Packers in order for Denver to to break through and end the run of NFC dominance in the big game.

The Packers couldn't win until the 49ers and Cowboys weaken.

The 49ers couldn't win until Dallas had over 20 players removed from their 1992 roster - and on top of that, they also had to cheat and count on a plehtora of injuries in order to get by in 1994.

The games have been wild in the last dozen years or so because the overall quality dispersed throughout the NFL has really plummeted.

The only way the NFL can get out of it is to decrease the amount of teams to 16 and increase the talent level. That will never happen though.

So we are stuck watching guys like Donovan McNabb be regarded as a God when 15-20 years earlier he probably would have never made a roster.

I was right there with you until you said this.

 

[klee34]

All I know is with each passing year (for the last five or six years) I care less and less about the NFL.

 

[Gumby74]

True, but you lose casual fans when teams like Arizona are playing in the Super Bowl. Teams still don't get great attendance when they aren't winning, regardless of last year. But in order to attract casual fans to games, you need big teams.

Arizona vs. Baltimore wouldn't draw nearly as many spectators as Dallas vs. Pittsburgh

"Teams like Arizona"? Hate to break it to you, but the casual fan isn't going to say, "Hey I've heard of the Giants or Cowboys, I'm going to be football fan now." They're going to be able to relate to the team the region/state represents. They're going to think "Hey, the team that represents MY state is in the SB. I'm going to watch!".

Winning promotes casual fans. Winning within the team state is by far the most powerful draw. Fans just aren't going to start watching football because they've heard of the Giants of Cowboys or some other team.

It's like when the Rangers won the Cup for the first time in a bazillion years a while back. All of a sudden all these New Yorkers were ranger fans.