Jump to content

  •  

Photo
- - - - -

Is it me or does winning a Super Bowl...


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#1 Gastineau Lives

Gastineau Lives

    JetNation Radio Has Been

  • Members
  • 3,869 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 07:08 PM

...not seem like such a big deal anymore. I'm not sure if it's my perception that has changed, or my feelings toward the game or the feeling that becoming Super Bowl champion is more of a random occurrence than a sign of greatness, of being the best team in football.

I know the games used to be blowouts, and that sucked and yes, this is better, but to me, the Ravens weren't the best team in football this year and the Giants were definitely not last year. I'm not certain they weren't, don't even know how you determine that, but they sure didn't feel like Super Bowl champions.

Does anyone else feel this way?
  • 1
"Those eight weeks I spent as co-host of JetNation Radio were among the happiest of my life. Oh, and F Tom Shane."

#2 Larz

Larz

    High priest of Syrinx

  • Members
  • 17,513 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 07:40 PM

how old are you ? my hero worshipping days ended when I was about 20. I'm 45 now and sports is just entertainment to me now, not much difference between the game, the ads and the halftime show really
  • 0
Like so many Americans, she was trying to construct a life that made sense from things she found in gift shops.

#3 FloridaJetsFan

FloridaJetsFan

    Hail Caesar

  • Members
  • 2,385 posts
  • LocationNavarre, FL

Posted 04 February 2013 - 07:52 PM

how old are you ? my hero worshipping days ended when I was about 20. I'm 45 now and sports is just entertainment to me now, not much difference between the game, the ads and the halftime show really


I don't think that's what he's saying. I think it's more about "back in the day," when Da Bears, the Niners, the G Men, etc, all dominated. With salary cap, you get parity, and teams are a lot closer than they used to be.
  • 1

#4 pedro55

pedro55

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,556 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 08:06 PM

There are no great teams anymore. It's a league of parity. Yes there are great organizations who seem to win every year, but that doesn't mean they are like the 49ers of old or the Steelers of old, etc. Remember the 'great' Patriots 'dynasty' a few years back, they always won games by 3 points.

Even the 'best' teams aren't all that great. The 18-0 Patriots were a great offensive team, defense was avg. And they weren't that dominate in the playoffs. The 15-1 Packers that lost in the playoffs had a terrible defense. The Patriots last year at what, 13-3, had a horrible defense.
The best teams over the past decade were the Colts who would go 14-2 or 13-3 every year. But they sucked in the playoffs because their defense wasn't very good and it was the all Manning show. And Manning chokes in the playoffs.

And it might be more about match ups. Elway's Bronco's were not that great of a team. They had some great players, but overall, nobody would ever call them one of the best teams of all time. Elway had some great moments and then like Manning, he kind of choked in the super bowl.

Plus free agency and greed kills great teams. A team like the 49ers could suddenly become this great dynasty. Except they will lose players. Look at the Patriots undefeated team from 2007-2008. There are like what, 2 or 3 players left from that team. And they are a winning organization who always competes for a super Bowl. Thats the biggest difference. Rice, Montana, Taylor, Lott, Rathman, etc were on the 49ers for years. Even after Montana was replaced by Young, Rice stuck around for years. Today, Rice probably would have been gone along with Montana.

It's a league of parity and greed. There is a salary cap. Too many players think they are worth far more than they actually are, but teams will pay them. Look at David Harris. Look at some of the players on the highest paid list. Look at Revis if he does get 16 Million per year. Look at Joe Flacco and his 20 Million per year demand. When a team is paying one player close to 20 Million per year, it will hurt them from signing other good to great players. People just don't like to think about that. If you have 2 or 3 players that take up 40 percent of your cap space, what do you think will happen? And what do you think will happen to players who demand top dollar? They'll jet for another team. So great teams are hard to build and remain intact these days. That's why great organizations seem to know how to replace players. Losing organizations seem to have no clue how to replace.
  • 0

#5 Obrien2Toon

Obrien2Toon

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,257 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 08:09 PM

Couldn't agree more, hate this parity crap. Loved the super power teams.

You do everything right build a great team like the current Niners, you don't deserve to have your team ripped apart in FA by teams who didn't do their job as well you.
  • 0

#6 Blackout

Blackout

    Circle Of Bosses

  • Members
  • 32,232 posts
  • Locationhome

Posted 04 February 2013 - 10:40 PM

is the thread starter suggesting we take the top teams in each conference and put them straight to the SB like college football so we don't get 9-7 teams in the SB anymore?


i'da loved to see Broncos vs Falcons as the SB this year
  • 0
"i'll rock forever....or at least until the Jets win the Superbowl" - Chino XL (1995)

#7 SenorGato

SenorGato

    Schottenhomer

  • Members
  • 20,218 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:06 PM

how old are you ? my hero worshipping days ended when I was about 20. I'm 45 now and sports is just entertainment to me now, not much difference between the game, the ads and the halftime show really


There's less scripting going on in the ads and halftime shows.

Edit: Ooph.

Edited by SenorGato, 04 February 2013 - 11:09 PM.

  • 0

We sick an' tired of-a your ism-skism game. Dyin' 'n' goin' to heaven in-a Jesus' name, Lord. We know when we understand:

Almighty God is a living man. - Bob Marley "Get up Stand up"


#8 Gastineau Lives

Gastineau Lives

    JetNation Radio Has Been

  • Members
  • 3,869 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:28 PM

is the thread starter suggesting we take the top teams in each conference and put them straight to the SB like college football so we don't get 9-7 teams in the SB anymore?


i'da loved to see Broncos vs Falcons as the SB this year


I'm not suggesting anything. I'm just saying that it feels like some of the luster has worn off from winning the Super Bowl and was wondering if anyone else felt that way or if it was just me not caring as much about the sport, in general.

Edited by Gastineau Lives, 04 February 2013 - 11:32 PM.

  • 0
"Those eight weeks I spent as co-host of JetNation Radio were among the happiest of my life. Oh, and F Tom Shane."

#9 Gastineau Lives

Gastineau Lives

    JetNation Radio Has Been

  • Members
  • 3,869 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:41 PM

how old are you ? my hero worshipping days ended when I was about 20. I'm 45 now and sports is just entertainment to me now, not much difference between the game, the ads and the halftime show really


So, I assume you are on a movie lovers website posting 13,000 times as well? How about one of those hot commercial-lovers websites? I bet you LOVE the CLIO awards!
  • 0
"Those eight weeks I spent as co-host of JetNation Radio were among the happiest of my life. Oh, and F Tom Shane."

#10 kay_gee

kay_gee

    full time Jets fan, part time troll

  • Writers \ Bloggers
  • 2,182 posts
  • Locationlive from New York

Posted 05 February 2013 - 12:07 AM

it'd probably be more glorious if the Jets were ever anywhere near winning one.
  • 1

#11 Greenseed4

Greenseed4

    Eskimo Brother

  • Members
  • 3,945 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 12:16 AM

I guess it is pretty misleading when a team that wins the Super Bowl isn't even the "best" team in their division.
  • 0

#12 Lil Bit Special

Lil Bit Special

    pumba lookin ass- Chris Ivory

  • Members
  • 22,727 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 12:39 AM

We should go the college football route. No more standings. Rankings only.
  • 0
When the weight of the world has got you down And you want to end your life,Bills to pay, a dead-end job,And problems with the wife.But don't throw in the tow'l,'Cuz there's a place right down the block...Where you can drink your misery away...At Flaming Moe's.... (Let's all go to Flaming Moe's...)When liquor in a mug (Let's all go to Flaming Moe's...)Can warm you like a hug. (Flaming Moe's...)And happiness is just a Flaming Moe away...

#13 SayNoToDMC

SayNoToDMC

    In search of terminally ill online girlfriend

  • Members
  • 6,549 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 12:47 AM

is the thread starter suggesting we take the top teams in each conference and put them straight to the SB like college football so we don't get 9-7 teams in the SB anymore?


i'da loved to see Broncos vs Falcons as the SB this year


I hate people who start stupid threads
  • 0

28ad228d-4df6-4b64-b890-b5246112bd82.jpg


#14 Lil Bit Special

Lil Bit Special

    pumba lookin ass- Chris Ivory

  • Members
  • 22,727 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 01:05 AM

I hate people who start stupid threads


This place would be a ghost town without stupid threads.
  • 0
When the weight of the world has got you down And you want to end your life,Bills to pay, a dead-end job,And problems with the wife.But don't throw in the tow'l,'Cuz there's a place right down the block...Where you can drink your misery away...At Flaming Moe's.... (Let's all go to Flaming Moe's...)When liquor in a mug (Let's all go to Flaming Moe's...)Can warm you like a hug. (Flaming Moe's...)And happiness is just a Flaming Moe away...

#15 SayNoToDMC

SayNoToDMC

    In search of terminally ill online girlfriend

  • Members
  • 6,549 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 01:25 AM

This place would be a ghost town without stupid threads.


Then Blackout deserves a lifetime achievement award
  • 0

28ad228d-4df6-4b64-b890-b5246112bd82.jpg


#16 Lil Bit Special

Lil Bit Special

    pumba lookin ass- Chris Ivory

  • Members
  • 22,727 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 01:38 AM

Then Blackout deserves a lifetime achievement award


The Lounge should be renamed in his honor. :-D
  • 0
When the weight of the world has got you down And you want to end your life,Bills to pay, a dead-end job,And problems with the wife.But don't throw in the tow'l,'Cuz there's a place right down the block...Where you can drink your misery away...At Flaming Moe's.... (Let's all go to Flaming Moe's...)When liquor in a mug (Let's all go to Flaming Moe's...)Can warm you like a hug. (Flaming Moe's...)And happiness is just a Flaming Moe away...

#17 pedro55

pedro55

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,556 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 03:29 AM

I guess it is pretty misleading when a team that wins the Super Bowl isn't even the "best" team in their division.


Baltimore did win their division. The NY Giants won their division last year.
Even with parity, it's not like #5 and #6 seeds are winning super bowls all the time.
NY Giants did it in 2007, Steelers did it in 2005, Packers did it in 2010. But you can't always go by where a team finishes anymore.
The Packers were a team that went 15-1 the following season. Some teams don't live up to expectations or have injuries. The Giants have been that team who starts off 6-2, gets bored, then blows the last month of the season. And the Steelers. Weren't they like 15-1 the year before they won the super bowl?

Look at this year. Ravens and 49ers were both in the Championship games the season before and were too unlucky plays away from facing each other.

Edited by pedro55, 05 February 2013 - 03:30 AM.

  • 0

#18 jack48

jack48

    2nd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,344 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:27 AM

Here is what I took from this SB, and from many other playoff games in recent years: so called good defenses are getting toasted. Both of these defenses were considered to be good ones and they were anything but. Nowadays a "good " defense is one that can get a stop in a big spot. Even if it does allow 30 points in a game.
  • 0

#19 Integrity28

Integrity28

    I love it when Idzik's plan comes together.

  • Members
  • 32,952 posts
  • Locationwrong guy in the wrong place at the wrong time

Posted 05 February 2013 - 07:55 AM

There are 3 phases to the NFL season, the regular, the playoffs and the super. The way I see it the relevancy of the games fits within the framework of this raw illustration:


Actual football fans <---------------------------> Casual fans <-----------------------------> Disinterested party goers, advertisers, consumers

Regular season --------------------------------------------->

Playoffs -------------------------------------------------> SuperBowl

-------------> SuperBowl
  • 1

"Idz a process."

 

Posted Image


#20 #27TheDominator

#27TheDominator

    Forza Rhinos!

  • Members
  • 27,325 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 09:29 AM

The major issues I am seeing are:

1. Parity. The league likes this because "on any given Sunday" people will go to games because they think they can win no matter who they are playing. There is also some level of inherent fairness where teams are not allowed to stockpile talent and keep great players on their bench denying them opportunity and contracts elsewhere. It's not going to change.

2. Too many playoff games. This makes it harder for teams to roll through the playoffs and more likely that some outlier will win a game and **** up the bracket. The league likes this because almost all the teams are in the playoff hunt until the final week and that keeps interest and attendance up. More playoff games increases revenue. Like hockey! It's not going to change.

3. Interleague play. In the old days, the 5th best team in the AFC could be better than the best team in NFC and nobody would know because they wouldn't have played each other. They wouldn't even have common opponents. Remember ye olde days when we used to look at preseason and prior pro bowl matchups to see how players might fare against each other in the big game? Gone. Hell, half the time the super bowl is a rematch of a game that happened within the last season or two.

1+2+3=$$$$$$

So, if anything it is going to move in the other direction.

Then Blackout deserves a lifetime achievement award


Nominated
  • 1

by Angel crazy with over 3000 post some day 


#21 Klecko73isGod

Klecko73isGod

    Anchor Salesman

  • Members
  • 21,791 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 09:41 AM

The major issues I am seeing are:

1. Parity. The league likes this because "on any given Sunday" people will go to games because they think they can win no matter who they are playing. There is also some level of inherent fairness where teams are not allowed to stockpile talent and keep great players on their bench denying them opportunity and contracts elsewhere. It's not going to change.

2. Too many playoff games. This makes it harder for teams to roll through the playoffs and more likely that some outlier will win a game and **** up the bracket. The league likes this because almost all the teams are in the playoff hunt until the final week and that keeps interest and attendance up. More playoff games increases revenue. Like hockey! It's not going to change.

3. Interleague play. In the old days, the 5th best team in the AFC could be better than the best team in NFC and nobody would know because they wouldn't have played each other. They wouldn't even have common opponents. Remember ye olde days when we used to look at preseason and prior pro bowl matchups to see how players might fare against each other in the big game? Gone. Hell, half the time the super bowl is a rematch of a game that happened within the last season or two.

1+2+3=$$$$$$

So, if anything it is going to move in the other direction.



Nominated


Not going to address #1 but as far as #2 is concerned the NFL playoffs have been three rounds for more than 30 years so I don't see how this has any effect.

Back in the 80s when you had the three division set up you had two wild cards. The three division winners all got byes and the WC teams played and then you had the divisional round, the conference championship and the SB. The in the late 80s or early 90s they added the third Wildcard team and too a bye away from the lowest ranked division champion - same number of rounds.

In the early 2000s they re-organized into the four division set up, went back to two WCs and stuck with three rounds of playoffs before the SB. Nothing has changed.

And as far as your #3 how old are you that you remember a time where there was no inter-conference play? Inter-conference play has been around since the 1970 merger. I am 41 and there has been no time in my NFL watching life that inter-conference play didn't exist.
  • 1
Posted Image

A RYAN ALWAYS SAUSAGES HIS FROSTED FLAKES


#22 #27TheDominator

#27TheDominator

    Forza Rhinos!

  • Members
  • 27,325 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 09:49 AM

Not going to address #1 but as far as #2 is concerned the NFL playoffs have been three rounds for more than 30 years so I don't see how this has any effect.

Back in the 80s when you had the three division set up you had two wild cards. The three division winners all got byes and the WC teams played and then you had the divisional round, the conference championship and the SB. The in the late 80s or early 90s they added the third Wildcard team and too a bye away from the lowest ranked division champion - same number of rounds.

In the early 2000s they re-organized into the four division set up, went back to two WCs and stuck with three rounds of playoffs before the SB. Nothing has changed.

And as far as your #3 how old are you that you remember a time where there was no inter-conference play? Inter-conference play has been around since the 1970 merger. I am 41 and there has been no time in my NFL watching life that inter-conference play didn't exist.


Maybe I'm confusing it with baseball, but I sure don't remember that many interconference games before the mid 80s. Guess I was wrong, but I thought it came with the 16 game schedule. As for how many rounds of playoffs, additional teams make for more chances. Maybe they haven't added rounds, but more teams making it = more non-dominant teams with a chance. They added a division for crying out loud. .
  • 0

by Angel crazy with over 3000 post some day 


#23 Klecko73isGod

Klecko73isGod

    Anchor Salesman

  • Members
  • 21,791 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 10:00 AM

Maybe I'm confusing it with baseball, but I sure don't remember that many interconference games before the mid 80s. Guess I was wrong, but I thought it came with the 16 game schedule. As for how many rounds of playoffs, additional teams make for more chances. Maybe they haven't added rounds, but more teams making it = more non-dominant teams with a chance. They added a division for crying out loud. .


The 16-game schedule came into being in the mid-1970s so that hasn't changed in more than 30 years either.

They added a division but they didn't add a bunch of new expansion teams and they really haven't added any teams to the playoff mix. There were five playoffs teams per conference from the late 70s to the early 90s and since then its been six teams. When they realigned they added a fourth division but they subtracted a wild card qualifier - you went from three division champions and three wildcards to four division champions and two wildcards.

3+3=6
4+2=6

This isn't rocket science.
  • 0
Posted Image

A RYAN ALWAYS SAUSAGES HIS FROSTED FLAKES


#24 #27TheDominator

#27TheDominator

    Forza Rhinos!

  • Members
  • 27,325 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 10:15 AM

The 16-game schedule came into being in the mid-1970s so that hasn't changed in more than 30 years either.

They added a division but they didn't add a bunch of new expansion teams and they really haven't added any teams to the playoff mix. There were five playoffs teams per conference from the late 70s to the early 90s and since then its been six teams. When they realigned they added a fourth division but they subtracted a wild card qualifier - you went from three division champions and three wildcards to four division champions and two wildcards.

3+3=6
4+2=6

This isn't rocket science.



..and the extra division dilutes the winners. You have teams getting in with worse records than the wild cards would have and getting home games See 8-8 Seattle vs. defending super bowl champ New Orleans.

I don't need to be told it isn't rocket science. I know that I did not research the facts. I'm going from memory on things that happened when I was 8-12 years old. I didn't say these were new things, but it has been a steady march towards this point and things are going to continue in this direction.
  • 0

by Angel crazy with over 3000 post some day 


#25 Klecko73isGod

Klecko73isGod

    Anchor Salesman

  • Members
  • 21,791 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 10:22 AM

..and the extra division dilutes the winners. You have teams getting in with worse records than the wild cards would have and getting home games See 8-8 Seattle vs. defending super bowl champ New Orleans.

I don't need to be told it isn't rocket science. I know that I did not research the facts. I'm going from memory on things that happened when I was 8-12 years old. I didn't say these were new things, but it has been a steady march towards this point and things are going to continue in this direction.


Yeah, but there were occaisionlly crappy division winners before, that's pretty much what led to the third wildcard in the old system.

None of the alignment changes had nearly the impact of unrestricted free agency and the salary cap.

But the reality of the NFL and all the off and on field rules changes is this: now, more than ever, this is a QB driven league. You think its a coincidence that this was the first time in a dozen years that you had no one named Brady, Manning or Rothliesberger starting at QB in the Super Bowl for the AFC?
  • 0
Posted Image

A RYAN ALWAYS SAUSAGES HIS FROSTED FLAKES





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users