Links
Archives
Where we try and help you win some coin. But remember kids, gambling is wrong. We would never actually bet real money (wink, wink)
Wednesday, December 18, 2002
NFL Parity or Parody?
by Vandal
Recent articles in a number of online journals have put forth the notion that the NFL doesn't have parity so much as it is mired in mediocrity. I find nothing compelling what so ever in this line of thinking. Let me offer you my reasoning. I would like to cover the whole league, but I'm lazy so let me give you just a few reasons why I think its all about parity:
1. Kansas City, at 7-7 is arguably mediocre. However, they have the league's top scoring offense and the sometimes #1-2 league leading running back; neither of which lends itself in support of the mediocrity theory.
2. Buffalo is 7-7. Drew Bledsoe is having a career season as the #2 passing yardage QB in the league, they have a 1000yd rusher and two 1000yd receivers; not very mediocre if you ask me.
3. NY Jets at 7-7, have the #2 rated passer with over 200 attempts, a 1000yd receiver, and by the end of the season they will have a 1000yd rusher (needs only 95 yds with 2 games left).
4. The AFC North, arguably one of the most mediocre divisions in the league, sports an 8-5 division leader who stumbled their way to the front, and two 7-7 teams. However, they have two 1000yd rushers, five 1000yd receivers, and one top 10 defense between them.
5. Losers with arguably good/great teams or team members: St Louis, Minnesota, Washington, Dallas.
Unfortunately, the bottom line doesn't draw a bright line between the two opinions.
The bottom line is that in terms of talent, there is statistically a truly normal distribution across these teams; and the teams that seem to win the most this season are the those that can dig down deep into themselves and stay motivated and focused. These are talents that don't necessarily come with the god given athleticism noted above.
The 2002 NFL season reminds me of those IMSA Driver's Races. The ones where the drivers all sit behind the wheels of cars equally equipped. It's a contest of skills, not technologies.
That's very similar to today's NFL. It's a contest of wills, not just skills. We have true parity. With a few exceptions, teams seem to be equally equipped. The real difference comes from those teams that want it most and are willing to stay committed to the sole purpose of winning. They will win. Teams who slip back into the ego driven old-school, "domination" mind-set, will lose. It's that simple.
Of course, a little luck couldn't hurt!
by Vandal
Recent articles in a number of online journals have put forth the notion that the NFL doesn't have parity so much as it is mired in mediocrity. I find nothing compelling what so ever in this line of thinking. Let me offer you my reasoning. I would like to cover the whole league, but I'm lazy so let me give you just a few reasons why I think its all about parity:
1. Kansas City, at 7-7 is arguably mediocre. However, they have the league's top scoring offense and the sometimes #1-2 league leading running back; neither of which lends itself in support of the mediocrity theory.
2. Buffalo is 7-7. Drew Bledsoe is having a career season as the #2 passing yardage QB in the league, they have a 1000yd rusher and two 1000yd receivers; not very mediocre if you ask me.
3. NY Jets at 7-7, have the #2 rated passer with over 200 attempts, a 1000yd receiver, and by the end of the season they will have a 1000yd rusher (needs only 95 yds with 2 games left).
4. The AFC North, arguably one of the most mediocre divisions in the league, sports an 8-5 division leader who stumbled their way to the front, and two 7-7 teams. However, they have two 1000yd rushers, five 1000yd receivers, and one top 10 defense between them.
5. Losers with arguably good/great teams or team members: St Louis, Minnesota, Washington, Dallas.
Unfortunately, the bottom line doesn't draw a bright line between the two opinions.
The bottom line is that in terms of talent, there is statistically a truly normal distribution across these teams; and the teams that seem to win the most this season are the those that can dig down deep into themselves and stay motivated and focused. These are talents that don't necessarily come with the god given athleticism noted above.
The 2002 NFL season reminds me of those IMSA Driver's Races. The ones where the drivers all sit behind the wheels of cars equally equipped. It's a contest of skills, not technologies.
That's very similar to today's NFL. It's a contest of wills, not just skills. We have true parity. With a few exceptions, teams seem to be equally equipped. The real difference comes from those teams that want it most and are willing to stay committed to the sole purpose of winning. They will win. Teams who slip back into the ego driven old-school, "domination" mind-set, will lose. It's that simple.
Of course, a little luck couldn't hurt!
Monday, December 16, 2002
Mail Call!
Here's why Banks does not deserve the Heisman over Palmer:
(1) Never threw for 300 yards (high of 275 yards). Palmer averaged
over
300 yards per game.
(2) Iowa ranked 7th in the Big-10 in passing.
(3) Iowa averaged more rush yards per game (222) than pass yards
(211).
(4) Played such out of conference powers as Akron, Miami of Ohio, Iowa
State (a loss) and Utah State. Did not play Ohio State.
(5) With a strong rushing attack and a weak schedule, Banks never had
to
go out and win a game or beat a defense geared to stop him.
Doctor J
Baltimore, MD
Here's why Banks does not deserve the Heisman over Palmer:
(1) Never threw for 300 yards (high of 275 yards). Palmer averaged
over
300 yards per game.
(2) Iowa ranked 7th in the Big-10 in passing.
(3) Iowa averaged more rush yards per game (222) than pass yards
(211).
(4) Played such out of conference powers as Akron, Miami of Ohio, Iowa
State (a loss) and Utah State. Did not play Ohio State.
(5) With a strong rushing attack and a weak schedule, Banks never had
to
go out and win a game or beat a defense geared to stop him.
Doctor J
Baltimore, MD
