Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

It's probably because you don't have a Packers related avatar Bond.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

In case you haven't noticed, this has been pretty much every year for the past 10 or so. There are no more dynasties. The NFL is actively bending the system such that every team is basically at about the same level. The idea is to establish parity. The fewer teams you have at 4-12, the more tickets you sell and interest you generate late in the season.

That’s why the team with the worst record gets the highest draft pick in the first round, but this is also the reasoning behind the salary cap, to keep the big market teams from outpacing the small markets like in baseball. The unfortunate thing is, unlike baseball, the NFL is in a good financial situation where all of its teams make money (maybe not the Cardinals, but everybody else) and there really is no reason for there to not be some salary flexibility. It would result in a MUCH better product on the field. There really aren't any truly good teams anymore, but it's a business not a game, so this is the way things are going to be.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

I acknowledge your sarcasm, but am also at the same time desperate, so I'll try it.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

I don't know man. I'm an Eagles fan and even I will admit that the Patriots are a legitimately GOOD team...You can't win 3 out of four and say they aren't.

I'd even say the Eagles having won 4 (5) straight division could qualify as a (much) lesser dynasty.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

the hard salary cap is what helps make the NFL the best professional sports league in the world.

the fact that the owners, coaches and front office have to WORK to build and create a successful franchise is fantastic, instead of MLB which often turns into an auction.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

To do what the Pats have done in this day and age is amazing, but even though the organization’s past 5 or 6 years to build this team may be the best 5 or 6 year run in the history of sports managing, this group of players wouldn't beat any other dynasty in NFL history (90s Boys, 90s Cos, 80s Giants, 80s 9ers, 70s Steelers, 70s Dolphins, 70s boys, 60's Pack, 50's Colts)


Oh no no no no no.


You wantonly throw money around in MLB, you still lose. See Late 90s dodgers and Os, Yankees now (might not even make the playoffs), Os now, Mets forever. The system in the NFL is the best of the major sports but there are two things I want changed.

1) Adopt a slotted system for draft picks, like the NBA

2) Allow teams to go over the salary cap to resign a player that they drafted. As a colts fan you have to know that either Edge or Wayne is going to be gone next year. Why should a team that drafts well be punished because their hand picked talent has matured to the point that they can no longer afford it?

Baseball teams, with 81 revenue opportunities a year, can’t make more money than NFL teams with 8. If that number isn’t completely staggering I don’t know what is. The problem with baseball isn’t so much that teams are allowed to spend freely as it is that some teams don’t make enough money (or are owned by people/companies not willing to spend enough money) to even compete. The Atletics don’t have a huge payroll but they’ve been one of the most consistant teams in the league the last 5-6 years. That being said, the As are still spending about 26 million more than the D rays (55ish to 29ish.) If you’ll take a look at the team payrolls:

http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp

You’ll notice that right around that 55-60 million dollar range (which is better than 2/3rds of the league) you see a big separation between the teams that are at least competitive and your bottom feeders. If baseball just had a little revenue sharing with a salary floor, you’d see a lot more competitive teams. At the very same time, however, you’ll see that there are teams in the top 15 that are absolutely dreadful.

It’s further proof that throwing money at a problem won’t necessarily make it go away, and it furthers my belief that the NFL could actually strengthen the game, remove some parity, allow a few teams to form a true upper echelon and make football a lot more interesting. Remember how great the Packers/Cowboys/49ers match ups in the mid 90s were? They would have made last weekend’s Steelers/Pats tilt look like a pre season game.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

You cant CANT CANT have a situation where only 20% of the league has a chance each year. It's boring. Then again, Im a business and marketing oriented person...To me, you cant have 32 teams in a league where only 5 or 6 have a shot at a title going into the seasn. Trim that league down to 16 and it's another story. If the NHL had 16 teams the game would be 5 times better. But the league is so watered down, the game has actually devolved. It's sad.

Same COULD be said about the NFL but it's a different game. Once a week games, different (bigger) fan base. It's a different situation. It's a business, first and foremost...and that interests me as a fan of the GAME. Look at the Bengals franchise right now. I love it...I love the fact that this team was absolute garbage 4 years ago, and without buying a new team the franchise will now be competing with the best of the best.

The on-field product...sure...it could be more entertaining. Moreso to the casual fan. I can watch a 13-7 game and appreciate good blocking or coverage or special teams. Most people cant...different strokes for different folks.

I DO agree with your 'exceptions for homebrew players' concept. Teams that draft well should benefit for a more extended period of time. My Colts have drafted about as well as any other team, right up there with the Ravens, over the past 7-8 years. The fact that some of these players will be gone soon doesnt sit well with me...but that's part of the business. With a new CBA on the horizon, we probably wont see any DRASTIC changes but I think the NFL is trying to open up the league just a little.

The NFL is right where it should be, in my mind.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

What do you mean only "20% of the teams have a chance"? MORE THAN 20% OF THE TEAMS IN BASEBALL MAKE THE PLAYOFFS! Only about 20% of the teams have NO chance when the season starts and if you added revenue sharing and a salary floor pertinent to that revenue sharing you'd eliminate that group of teams that was perennially out of it.

also:

I'd be able to appreciate good coverage but unfortunately you can't SEE it 99.9% of the time (on tv at least, believe it or not I've never been to a game over the High School level.)

Aside from that, I don't have a problem with the fact that the Bengalis are 3-0, I just don't know if the Bengalis are a good team, I don't know if the Bills, at -2 are a bad team, I'm willing to bet that they're both average teams. I think the Pats, Colts, Steelers and Eagles are slightly better than the rest of the teams in the league, and I think the Packers, Texans, Jets and Cardinals are slightly worse.

That leaves 26 teams that I think will finish anywhere from 6-10 to 10-6 but I do not believe for a second that the 10 and 6 teams would dominate the 6 and 10 teams across the board. Some teams just got a little more luck, a few more calls, a few less injuries. Granted, you could always say the same, but unlike now 10 or 15 years ago the 10 and 6 teams were markedly better than the 6 and 10 teams, and I don't believe that to be the case anymore.

Upsets aren’t special anymore. Yes, “any given Sunday” has always been true, but it’s a little too true now and I can’t see how that strengthens the game.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

and i can name a couple playoff teams that wont stand a chance of winning the world series...what's your point?

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

One of those teams in 2003 would have been the Marlins.
And one of those teams in 2002 would have been the Angels.
One of those teams in 1997 would have been the Marlins.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

Lions suck.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

i see your point, no doubt. there are exceptions.


anyways, who's psyched for week 4?

the Jets offense (3rd string QB and all) might be in trouble vs. the Ravens

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

The lions might be in trouble, whole f**king season.

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

well, they ARE first place in the NFC North :)


:unsure:

:lol:

Re: THE NFL 2005-2006 Thread.
 

Oh... the Pack is finally back.