MemphisEagles Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Eagles are number 1, that's all I care about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 If you average each team's number of wins through this part of the season, its the same as it ever was! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Slim Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, MathMan said: If you average each team's number of wins through this part of the season, its the same as it ever was! apt name this was a solid double century post imho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted October 20, 2017 Author Share Posted October 20, 2017 1 hour ago, MathMan said: If you average each team's number of wins through this part of the season, its the same as it ever was! I don't think it would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 6 minutes ago, Hunter2_1 said: I don't think it would be. If you count ties as half wins, and assume the same number of byes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renndawg37 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 13 hours ago, riceman80 said: I'd rather have parity than it be like the NBA. 2-4 teams competing all season for a trophy is boring as hell Pretty much. I think they may discuss eliminating the regular season in basketball entirely, as it is an unnecessary risk to players' health. Just have Cleveland and Golden State play and call it a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 4 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said: I don't think it would be. Assuming the same number of games have been played, then yes, they would. Not sure if you’re aware that every team would average to .500 in this scenario, no matter which season you’re looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y*so*blu Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 I think last night's game is a very interesting example of parity at work. After years of mediocrity, even the Raiders were able to build a competitive and resilient team that knocked off the number one squad in the AFC. Someone on Youtube said that predicting NFL games this season is like trying to predict the lottery. If that's not parity at work, I don't know what is. I'm a lot more excited about football, as a fan, than I was at the same time last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 17 hours ago, theJ said: @FourThreeMafia I want to clarify this statement (it's too early in the morning) - if what you mean is that you define parity as maximizing the amount of legitimate super bowl contenders, then i agree with that definition. But i disagree that we don't have that this year. If the early season trend stays, and we don't see some good teams run away from the pack, we're going to have a number of "average" teams making the playoffs. Maximizing the chances we see a 9-7 team win the superbowl. Yes, that is what I meant. Perhaps there is a BIT more parity, but I dont think its notably more. Certain teams are getting better, some have regressed, but ultimately, I think it will even out. The fact that there isnt a huge disparity in the standings after 6 weeks doesnt mean much to me. In terms of the amount of teams I think are legit contenders, I think its largely the same....and alot of the teams are the same IMO...with teams like the Eagles and Rams supplanting teams like the Cardinals and Broncos. Staples like the Pats, Steelers, Chiefs, Packers (before Rodgers got hurt) and Seahawks are still among the top contenders IMO. Im not trying to get into a huge debate about it because it doesnt really bother me either way. I just dont see a huge difference between this year and other years when talking about the amount of TRUE contenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted October 21, 2017 Author Share Posted October 21, 2017 4 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said: Yes, that is what I meant. Perhaps there is a BIT more parity, but I dont think its notably more. Certain teams are getting better, some have regressed, but ultimately, I think it will even out. The fact that there isnt a huge disparity in the standings after 6 weeks doesnt mean much to me. In terms of the amount of teams I think are legit contenders, I think its largely the same....and alot of the teams are the same IMO...with teams like the Eagles and Rams supplanting teams like the Cardinals and Broncos. Staples like the Pats, Steelers, Chiefs, Packers (before Rodgers got hurt) and Seahawks are still among the top contenders IMO. Im not trying to get into a huge debate about it because it doesnt really bother me either way. I just dont see a huge difference between this year and other years when talking about the amount of TRUE contenders. I guess the difference is, many teams share the same W/L ratio as your aforementioned staples. Steelers and Pats = Rams, Vikings, Packers, Panthers Seahawks = Saints, Falcons, Redskins, Bills, Dolphins, Broncos. I agree it won't stay like this, and those 4 teams you mentioned will pull away, but for now, there's a lot of 3/3,4/2, 3/2 going around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 3 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said: I guess the difference is, many teams share the same W/L ratio as your aforementioned staples. Steelers and Pats = Rams, Vikings, Packers, Panthers Seahawks = Saints, Falcons, Redskins, Bills, Dolphins, Broncos. I agree it won't stay like this, and those 4 teams you mentioned will pull away, but for now, there's a lot of 3/3,4/2, 3/2 going around. I agree with that. But my point is that I dont think that alot of those teams are true contenders or teams that will stick around. Every year, there are 2 or 3 surprise teams. This year, I feel like there have been several fluke wins by bad teams and maybe some good teams losing games that they really shouldnt or normally wouldnt lose. I dont think its because more teams are necessarily on a level playing field. Thats why I think its too early to really talk about this, because I think its around week 8 or 9 where the men contenders start to truly distance themselves from the pretenders.....and honestly, when that happens, I dont think it will be MUCH different from what we normally see...even if there are some more teams that are lingering around more than usual. Only thing I will say in support of parity is that I dont think there are any clear cut favorites like there have been in past years. Although I do think Belichick and the Pats will get some things sorted out and be very dangerous again by the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted October 21, 2017 Author Share Posted October 21, 2017 We usually always have multiple 11-14 win teams (so, NOT like the NBA). Then the mediocrity; the ones who are "in the hunt", then the bad teams. Then Cleveland. That's the model I like. Not pull a team from a hat and that's the winner Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwibrown Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 On 10/20/2017 at 6:11 AM, HorizontoZenith said: Aaron Rodgers hurt, Patriots defense having a bad year, and only three elite quarterbacks, one of which likely out for the year. The NFL has a talent problem. That leads to more parity. Once Brees retires in two-ish years, and once Brady retires in two-ish years, we'll probably have crap quarterbacks winning Super Bowls and crappier quarterbacks winning MVPs. There will still be some elite QB's. I think of Carr maturing. also Rodgers will be a wylie vet and will still be fantastic, just more cerebal. Also I think mariota, Winston, Goff and Wentz will be elite QB's. Dak will most likely be great as well. Russell Wilson will continue for a few more yeas as well. there are plenty of guys that are going to be very very good. I think we are coming to the end of an era of some great QB's in Big Ben, Peyton Manning, Eli, Tom, Drew, Rivers, Flacco. These were the face of the NFL for two decades, we are now entering unfamiliar territory. New guys and a new flavor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 On 10/19/2017 at 12:18 PM, FourThreeMafia said: Is there TRULY that much NEW parity? The Patriots have always owned the AFC East, and even though they look very beatable right now, still do. Steelers are at the front of the North, which isnt uncommon, and the Bengals and Ravens arent super far behind. Browns are still the Browns. AFC South is always a crapshoot...still is. Chiefs leading the AFC West....not uncommon. Broncos arent far behind. The NFC East and NFC South are two division that regularly alternate division winners....so that "parity" has existed for awhile. Minnesota and GB lead the NFC North...but GB will fall behind due to Rogers injury. Not true parity....just the consequence of an injury to a key player. And with the NFC West...the Rams have been an up and coming team that finally got the right pieces in place to make it happen. Call it parity if you want, but I think the Rams are just replacing the Cardinals as the main challengers to the Seahawks going forward. Im not saying there is no parity....but I dont see any major change from what its been all along. You are confusing parity with whose winning in the standings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOaktown_56 Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Remember in NFL Gen when people were asking if the Pats would lose a game or go 16-0? Me too. Parity is great to see. I'm pretty excited to see how this season plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.