.500 teams

Clinton Portis · Post by **Clinton Portis** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:19 pm

patrickg68 wrote:Of course your excited about the upcoming games. The NFL has now left the preseason and is now 5 months after the beginning of training camp finally starting to play some games that mean something.

All the games mean something even if your losing because winning is gratifying. The Sunday game against the Vikes, Meaningless you might say but it ment alot to us skin fans to see the Redskins beat the Vikes. Its the feeling and excitement of winning and not knowing what going to happen that makes the regular season fun to watch and emulate. For me its interesting because I want to see what happenes if you add certain players, and take others out and see what record you get.

I will watch the playoffs because I wanna see who will be champ. And even though the 8-8 teams might not seem to deserve that playoff spot, they have to be in it, because in almost every competition there is an underdog, it isnt just the best of the best. The USC and OU game SEEMED like the best of the best, but they score obviously showed otherwise.

patrickg68 · Post by **patrickg68** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:29 pm

If you can't rely on the regular season to determine who the best team is, or who the top two teams are, then why even have it? Just dump the regular season and have an all inclusive tournament. The fact is that 16 games is a larger sample size than 3 or 4 games. You only play 6 games against your division, and the other 10 are against the rest of the league. Pittsburgh by going 15-1 has clearly had the best season in the nfl and it is unfair for them to have to compete with anyone else to go to the super bowl.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 2:13 am

patrickg68 wrote:Pittsburgh by going 15-1 has clearly had the best season in the nfl and it is unfair for them to have to compete with anyone else to go to the super bowl.

...

Yes... Clearly they earned a trip to the Superbowl with a 15 win season by overcoming teams such as... Miami, Oakland, Cleveland(2 times), Cincinnati (2 times), Baltimore, Dallas, Giants, Washington, Buffalo, Jacksonville...

None of these teams had 10 wins, 6 of the teams have 10 or more losses, and none of them are in the Playoffs....

I'll give them credit that they beat Philly, New England, and the Jets... but like you yourself has said.. anybody can have a bad day.. even in the regular season.

Luckly, teams like Atlanta, Green Bay, San Diego, or Indy didn't have to face the mighty Steelers...

So your saying because they got an easy schedule... they should automatically go to the Super Bowl? Do you actually believe the stuff that your posting? ....or have you dug a hole so deep and you're not sure how to get out of it so you're just putting anything that might help save face..down? :lol:

patrickg68 · Post by **patrickg68** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 3:43 pm

Are you guys retarded? Are all those teams you mentioned playing highschool football? The talent levels of the the different teams in the nfl aren't all that different. The difference between a strong schedule and a weak schedule is very small. Pittsburgh dominated the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the league and you are acting like they beat a bunch of 8 year olds playing pop warner. You are going in the exact opposite direction of me. Not only do you agree that the nfl regular season doesn't mean anything, you don't want it to. Why are Pittsburghs wins against New England and Philadelphia in the regular season so much less impressive than they would be in the post season? Was New England playing without Tom Brady? Was Philadelphia playing their backups? The teams that play in the regular season are the same teams that play in the post season. Its not like Pittsburgh will be facing a bunch of playoff teams that have become more talented since the regular season ended.

joebagadonuts · Post by **joebagadonuts** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 4:29 pm

patrickg68 wrote:The teams that play in the regular season are the same teams that play in the post season. Its not like Pittsburgh will be facing a bunch of playoff teams that have become more talented since the regular season ended.

have you ever watched an nfl playoff game? seriously, have you? if you can't see the difference in the intensity level from the regular season to the post-season, then perhaps this discussion is a waste of time.

your are correct, teams are not more talented than they were in week 1. but they are much more motivated to win. if you lose in the regular season, you still play next week. you lose in the playoffs, you go home. these guys are competitive enough that the propect of losing bothers them enough to take their play to another level come playoff time.

oh, and i'm not retarded. my mom says i'm just 'special'.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:03 pm

patrickg68 wrote:Are you guys retarded? Are all those teams you mentioned playing highschool football? The talent levels of the the different teams in the nfl aren't all that different. The difference between a strong schedule and a weak schedule is very small. Pittsburgh dominated the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the league and you are acting like they beat a bunch of 8 year olds playing pop warner. You are going in the exact opposite direction of me. Not only do you agree that the nfl regular season doesn't mean anything, you don't want it to. Why are Pittsburghs wins against New England and Philadelphia in the regular season so much less impressive than they would be in the post season? Was New England playing without Tom Brady? Was Philadelphia playing their backups? The teams that play in the regular season are the same teams that play in the post season. Its not like Pittsburgh will be facing a bunch of playoff teams that have become more talented since the regular season ended.

you saying that a team that beats 2 good teams, and 13 bad teams during a season, automatically deserves a trip to the Superbowl is what's retarded...

patrickg68 · Post by **patrickg68** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:58 pm

Giving a team that goes 15 and 1 trip to the super bowl makes a hell of a lot more sense than allowing two 8-8 teams into the playoffs. Your entire argument doesn't make sense because you are defending 8-8 teams and bashing the team that went 15-1.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:18 pm

I'm not bashing any team that went 15-1, but nor do I think they should get a free pass to the superbowl just because their schedule appeared easier than others

Think March Madness... the NFL is about placing yourself in the tournament and positioning yourself in it... The tournament is what we call "the Playoffs"... the regular season is what they have to determine the best 12 teams that get to play in the tournament out of 32 ....whether a team has an 8-8 record and in the playoffs... they still managed to become one of the best 12 teams in the league... and they earn the right to compete in the tournament... just like everybody else.... If the team with the best record in the regular season can't beat out another team when the pressure is at it's highest..... then they are not the best team... the best team is the one that can overcome an opponent when that opponent is giving them everything they have....

The tournament style is what makes every major sport exciting... football, baseball, basketball, hockey... That's why they're major sports, because anybody can win as long as they are able to overcome the other teams best effort and still come out on top...

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 2:10 am

. . .and if the 8-8 teams are so bad and don't even deserve a chance to go to the Superbowl, why are we so scared that they might knock off the 15-1 team in the first place?

BTP is right--don't think of it as an 8-8 team in the playoff, think of it as one of the 12 best teams. Sometimes one of the 12 best will have a lower record because of the way that divisions and conferences work out, but that's no reason to abandon the system.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 4:17 am

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:. . .and if the 8-8 teams are so bad and don't even deserve a chance to go to the Superbowl, why are we so scared that they might knock off the 15-1 team in the first place?

also... if an 8-8 team beat 3 teams "supposedly" better than them in the wild-card, divisional, and Conference Championship rounds... and then beat whoever their opponent is in the Superbowl... you wouldn't consider them the best team? They would knock off 4 of the best teams in football! They've gotta be considered the best...

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 2:00 pm

also... if an 8-8 team beat 3 teams "supposedly" better than them in the wild-card, divisional, and Conference Championship rounds... and then beat whoever their opponent is in the Superbowl... you wouldn't consider them the best team? They would knock off 4 of the best teams in football! They've gotta be considered the best...

Especially, like you said, when you take into account that some teams will have easier schedules based on their divisions. For years, the Ravens have enjoyed the easiest conference in the NFL, and besides that fluke year in which they got to play the Giants (of all people) in the Superbowl, they've also shown that they aren't the best team.

That's gotta go down as one of the worst Superbowls ever, by the way. . .I don't think anyone wanted either of those teams in there.

patrickg68 · Post by **patrickg68** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 11:36 pm

Oh, so what you are saying is that neither the Ravens nor the Giants were the two best teams in the league in 2000. That just proves my arguement.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Sun Jan 09, 2005 10:02 am

patrickg68 wrote:Oh, so what you are saying is that neither the Ravens nor the Giants were the two best teams in the league in 2000. That just proves my arguement.

Now you're just dancing my friend... all the stuff we explained... and you decide to pick this out of the pile... :roll:

I didn't know we we're at the club or I would have brought my dancing shoes.....

If you don't like the pro level and aren't trying to listen to why others think otherwise... then again, why are you here?

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:34 pm

patrickg68 wrote:Oh, so what you are saying is that neither the Ravens nor the Giants were the two best teams in the league in 2000. That just proves my arguement.

No, it's just one of the complexities that comes with the territory.

Let's say that you have a team that starts 10-1, but finishes 0-5 on the year (Minnesota has done nearly that in recent memory). On the other hand, you have a team (like the Panthers of this year) that starts 0-7, but finishes 9-0 on the year. The second team, most would agree (I'm assuming here that you would) is probably the better team. But if we let just the 16 games of regular season play decide who's the best, the first team with the enormous losing streak gets the nod.

Yeah, the Ravens and Giants made it to that Superbowl, AND like I said that Superbowl was a fluke if I ever saw one. The current system makes teams prove that they have what it takes to be number one through the playoffs. Playoffs are the equalizer.

Using just the regular season, look at the teams that the Cowboys beat to become 10-6 last year--their schedule hid their lack of talent. One teams effort that makes them 8-8 might be another team's 10-6 based on divisions and scheduling. . .so why complain that your 10-6 team might have to play a .500 team on the road to the Superbowl?

patrickg68 · Post by **patrickg68** » Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:13 pm

Any team can play well for spurts. So what if a team starts off losing its first 8 games and then wins its last 8 games. What, the 8 losses don't count? After playing 16 games, you will at the very least have a pretty good idea of who either the best team is, or the top 2 or 3 teams are. 12 teams is excessive. At most it should be 4.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:32 pm

Okay, I guess we'll just have to disagree. I think that you've gotta have a much larger pool of teams than 4 to account for everything that happens in a regular season, and am unconvinced by your arguments as to why there shouldn't be more than 4.

joebagadonuts · Post by **joebagadonuts** » Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:58 pm

boy, that seattle (9-7) - st. louis (8-8) game SUCKED this weekend, eh? bo-ring. :roll:

patrickg68 · Post by **patrickg68** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 2:50 pm

If either St. Louis or Minnesota is the best team in football, then how did they lose all those games? If Pittsburgh isn't the best team in football, then how did they end up with the best record? How is it fair that a team can go undefeated in the regular season, and still have to compete with other teams for a trip to the Super Bowl? What if Pittsburgh loses Ben Roethlisberger to an injury in a playoff game they shouldn't even be playing? In a legitimate system, hard work and success are rewarded. The NFL is exactly like communism. What incentive is there to have a great regular season if you know that 8-8 can get you into the playoffs? The NFL rewards mediocrity. In college football there is always the pressure to not lose a game because it could mean the end of your national title hopes. That is what makes college football special. There are no great nfl teams anymore. The Patriots aren't a dynasty. They didn't even make the playoffs in 2002. They are just the best of a mediocre bunch.

General Failure · Post by **General Failure** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 2:55 pm

patrickg68 wrote:If either St. Louis or Minnesota is the best team in football, then how did they lose all those games?

Yes, that's a tough one to answer.

patrickg68 wrote:What if Pittsburgh loses Ben Roethlisberger to an injury in a playoff game

Pshaw! If injuries don't effect regular season games surely they can't effect playoff games.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 3:16 pm

patrickg68 wrote:If either St. Louis or Minnesota is the best team in football, then how did they lose all those games?

you said it yourself... some times teams have bad days...

patrickg68 wrote: If Pittsburgh isn't the best team in football, then how did they end up with the best record?

easy schedule.....

patrickg68 wrote: How is it fair that a team can go undefeated in the regular season, and still have to compete with other teams for a trip to the Super Bowl?

What if 3 teams went undefeated? How do you fix that... huh? tell me? huh? tell me?

patrickg68 wrote: What if Pittsburgh loses Ben Roethlisberger to an injury in a playoff game they shouldn't even be playing?

They'd be fine... Maddox beat Buffalo, one of the hottest teams in the NFL, the last week of the season...

patrickg68 wrote:In a legitimate system, hard work and success are rewarded.

It's rewarded in the NFL... they get home field advantage through out the playoffs... college football doesn't do that... they must not be legitimate....

patrickg68 wrote: The NFL is exactly like communism.

.... oh yeah.... exactly like communism... :lol:

patrickg68 wrote:What incentive is there to have a great regular season if you know that 8-8 can get you into the playoffs?

Incentives: Home Field Advantage through out the playoffs... and you don't know that 8-8 will get you in the playoffs... in fact, if you follow Pro football regularly... you would know it doesn't happen very often....

patrickg68 wrote:The NFL rewards mediocrity. In college football there is always the pressure to not lose a game because it could mean the end of your national title hopes.

Well what happens if the star QB, or RB has to be out a week in College football.... how's that fair? They must be communists....

patrickg68 wrote: That is what makes college football special. There are no great nfl teams anymore. The Patriots aren't a dynasty. They didn't even make the playoffs in 2002. They are just the best of a mediocre bunch.

Yes... you're right... millions of people around the world root for players and teams who are mediocre.... the same players and teams that are formed from your democratic college football... :shock:

... damn commies... :lol: