A sad day for NFL football.............
A sad day for NFL football.............
I've been lamenting for the last decade the watered-down product that the salary cap and free agency has and will bring to the NFL.
This years NFC playoff disaster is the poster boy for this PC age of football.
Now we have to endure and put up with the final three teams in the NFC being the Seahawks, Bears and the Panthers. As if anyone gives a damn.
I know, I know. Around these parts there may be a little exitement about Seattle. But what does it say about the NFL when the Seahawks might be the best team in the NFC??
There are only so many teams that have "nationwide" appeal, and will sell out any venue and get ultimate TV ratings. Dallas, the Whiners, Steelers, Raiders, Dolphins, Broncos, Skins, Packers, and a few others have fans EVERYWHERE.
There was a day when the Super Bowl was a universal experience for all, and everyone tuned in for the event. What's next? The Saints vs. the Browns?? It could happen. ANYTHING could happen in this day and age of rules that make it "fair" and "democratic" for every team. That may sound nice on paper, but how do you think the NFL feels about a possible Super Bowl matchup that pits the Seahawks against the Steelers?
I for one will be washing my car and cutting my grass untill the fourth quarter. If it's close I MAY watch the last six minutes, unless one of my children needs help with his Bionicle!
This years NFC playoff disaster is the poster boy for this PC age of football.
Now we have to endure and put up with the final three teams in the NFC being the Seahawks, Bears and the Panthers. As if anyone gives a damn.
I know, I know. Around these parts there may be a little exitement about Seattle. But what does it say about the NFL when the Seahawks might be the best team in the NFC??
There are only so many teams that have "nationwide" appeal, and will sell out any venue and get ultimate TV ratings. Dallas, the Whiners, Steelers, Raiders, Dolphins, Broncos, Skins, Packers, and a few others have fans EVERYWHERE.
There was a day when the Super Bowl was a universal experience for all, and everyone tuned in for the event. What's next? The Saints vs. the Browns?? It could happen. ANYTHING could happen in this day and age of rules that make it "fair" and "democratic" for every team. That may sound nice on paper, but how do you think the NFL feels about a possible Super Bowl matchup that pits the Seahawks against the Steelers?
I for one will be washing my car and cutting my grass untill the fourth quarter. If it's close I MAY watch the last six minutes, unless one of my children needs help with his Bionicle!
- H20
- Moderator
- Posts: 12231
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:42 pm
- MLB: Not a big fan of MLB.
- NBA: Celtics
- NFL: Falcons
- Location: Waimea, Big Island - Cold Country, LOVE IT
I was thinking along the same lines watching the Seahawks/Redskins game. It doesn't matter who gets in from the AFC, the NFC is probably going to get blasted. Steelers, Colts, Broncos, Patriots vs either the Bears, Panthers or Seahawks? The Panthers and Seahawks (we'll have to wait and see about Alexander) have some offense but whoever comes out the the NFC will be heavy underdogs. If it has to do with the cap I havent thought much about that part, but I do like competitive games where anyone has a chance at the beginning of the year.
-
- Play Maker
- Posts: 883
- Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 9:15 pm
- MLB: Orioles
what's the big deal? so it might end up being a seattle-pittsburgh super bowl. get over it. i for one love the parity and think the salary cap should be carried over to the mlb. of course i'm an orioles fan and absolutely despise everything yankee. thank god their overspending has gotten them nothing over the past five years. here's to another five... i digress.
how is the product watered down? they are the same players that would be playing without a salary cap, albeit on different teams. what's the sense of having a floundering franchise in cincinnati or jacksonville? why have teams just for the sake of having teams? look at tampa bay and kansas city... while their football teams have been very competitive recently and attracting renewed local interest, their baseball teams continue to flounder. who's to say teams like cincinnati and seattle won't grow a national fan base as well? i can tell you one thing, the patriots were crap when i was growing up... you talk to kids nowadays and they'd swear up-and-down that the patriots have dominated for decades.
i think people concentrate too much on the brand and not the play on the field. carson palmer, chad johnson and rudi johnson play for the bengals, therefore i will not watch them play because the bengals are historically bad... give me a break. in my mind, the super bowl still carries the same luster it has in the past.
how is the product watered down? they are the same players that would be playing without a salary cap, albeit on different teams. what's the sense of having a floundering franchise in cincinnati or jacksonville? why have teams just for the sake of having teams? look at tampa bay and kansas city... while their football teams have been very competitive recently and attracting renewed local interest, their baseball teams continue to flounder. who's to say teams like cincinnati and seattle won't grow a national fan base as well? i can tell you one thing, the patriots were crap when i was growing up... you talk to kids nowadays and they'd swear up-and-down that the patriots have dominated for decades.
i think people concentrate too much on the brand and not the play on the field. carson palmer, chad johnson and rudi johnson play for the bengals, therefore i will not watch them play because the bengals are historically bad... give me a break. in my mind, the super bowl still carries the same luster it has in the past.
- IPatentllo7o1
- All-American
- Posts: 1864
- Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 1:07 am
- Location: Honolulu Hawaii
I guess it's a matter of age (when you grew up watching the NFL) and what your opinion of quality football is. To each his own, it's like the perpetual debate about who the best heavyweight champion was. The era YOU come from has alot to do with what you think about it.
I'll tell what I know for sure though...........If you were in charge of the NFL product, TV revenues, sales, the financial bottom line, etc..........who would you want playing in the Super Bowl? Would you want a franchise with history and a storied past, or would you want the Jacksonville Jaguars?
Nothing against the Jag's, or any team for that matter. Every team deserves the oppurtunity to begin in July and work hard and earn the rings. My perspective is that, no matter where you live, from Carolina to L.A, from Chicago to San Antonio and everywhere in between, you'll find fans of the Raiders, the Dolphins, Dallas, Green Bay, and a handfull of others. If I were the president of ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX, and it was my turn at the big game, I'm on my hands and knees praying for the Raiders vs. the Cowboys, or the Niners vs. the Steelers.
Everyone also knows that before the "it's for the love of the game" crowd starts crowing, it's all about the money. From the players to the coaches, up to the owners and player association, and onto the TV folks and cities that are fortunate to have NFL teams, everyones in it for the bucks. It's unfortunate but very true. From that perspective, free agency, salary cap and other measures to bring about the PC parity is a disaster.
I'll tell what I know for sure though...........If you were in charge of the NFL product, TV revenues, sales, the financial bottom line, etc..........who would you want playing in the Super Bowl? Would you want a franchise with history and a storied past, or would you want the Jacksonville Jaguars?
Nothing against the Jag's, or any team for that matter. Every team deserves the oppurtunity to begin in July and work hard and earn the rings. My perspective is that, no matter where you live, from Carolina to L.A, from Chicago to San Antonio and everywhere in between, you'll find fans of the Raiders, the Dolphins, Dallas, Green Bay, and a handfull of others. If I were the president of ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX, and it was my turn at the big game, I'm on my hands and knees praying for the Raiders vs. the Cowboys, or the Niners vs. the Steelers.
Everyone also knows that before the "it's for the love of the game" crowd starts crowing, it's all about the money. From the players to the coaches, up to the owners and player association, and onto the TV folks and cities that are fortunate to have NFL teams, everyones in it for the bucks. It's unfortunate but very true. From that perspective, free agency, salary cap and other measures to bring about the PC parity is a disaster.
-
- Pine rider
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:22 am
- Location: Maui boy now living in Oregon
"PC parity?"
Excuse me, but that's a really dumb phrase.
The parity is not about being PC, its about money. If owners can't field a competitive/winning team, they can't sell tickets. They don't sell tickets, they operate at a deficit. Same goes for revenue sharing - clubs in large markets were able to spend much more money because they were able to generate much more income.
The salary cap isn't about being PC. Or even too much about parity. It's about money. If there wasn't a salary cap, star players could demand so much money and eventually drive to salary structure up so high that once again the owners would operate at a deficit. (And really, in turn jack up ticket/merchandise prices even more. But that's another discussion)
And really, parity was driven by the player's union. The player's union has been pushing for free agency since at least the 80s. And every round of collective bargaining they push some more. It's about players being able to shop around for the best offer - something they weren't able to do prior to free agency.
As far as the NFL is concerned, a team that does not have a storied history making it to the playoffs or Super Bowl is a great thing. Excitment in a new market stimulates sales.
And honestly, why can't one of these teams without a storied history be writing theirs right now? Newsflash: Pats pretty much sucked for 30 years until Parcells took over and made them competitive. Dallas started as a really crappy expansion team that took awhile to get its feet under it and became "America's Team" via a long and active marketing campaign.
Really, the NFL's marketing strategy is long-term and has been for awhile. Developing new fans and new fanbases is part of their strategy. The NFL is making more money now than ever. Their plan is to continue that trend in the long-term. The short term is somewhat irrelevant to the league.
Excuse me, but that's a really dumb phrase.
The parity is not about being PC, its about money. If owners can't field a competitive/winning team, they can't sell tickets. They don't sell tickets, they operate at a deficit. Same goes for revenue sharing - clubs in large markets were able to spend much more money because they were able to generate much more income.
The salary cap isn't about being PC. Or even too much about parity. It's about money. If there wasn't a salary cap, star players could demand so much money and eventually drive to salary structure up so high that once again the owners would operate at a deficit. (And really, in turn jack up ticket/merchandise prices even more. But that's another discussion)
And really, parity was driven by the player's union. The player's union has been pushing for free agency since at least the 80s. And every round of collective bargaining they push some more. It's about players being able to shop around for the best offer - something they weren't able to do prior to free agency.
As far as the NFL is concerned, a team that does not have a storied history making it to the playoffs or Super Bowl is a great thing. Excitment in a new market stimulates sales.
And honestly, why can't one of these teams without a storied history be writing theirs right now? Newsflash: Pats pretty much sucked for 30 years until Parcells took over and made them competitive. Dallas started as a really crappy expansion team that took awhile to get its feet under it and became "America's Team" via a long and active marketing campaign.
Really, the NFL's marketing strategy is long-term and has been for awhile. Developing new fans and new fanbases is part of their strategy. The NFL is making more money now than ever. Their plan is to continue that trend in the long-term. The short term is somewhat irrelevant to the league.
Question...............and case in point:
How much Chicago White Sox apparel, caps, and paraphenalia have you seen being worn. I travel a little bit. I've been around a little since October and can honestly say I haven't seen one White Sox hat or shirt being worn either here in Hawaii, Vegas, LA, etc...........
Now, if the Cubs won the WS, you and I both know you'd see nothing but Cubs stuff all over.
You don't have to be the head cashier at Walmart to figure out why this is.
Where were all these Red Sox fans before last October? Everywhere I look both here and abroad, I see nothing but Boston garb.
Why? Because the Red Sox are a sexy, fashionable, old time historical team with a rich (albeit undeserved) history. This White Sox win is the most un-relished in recent history. The ratings for the Astro-White Sox series was one of the worst in recent times, noone cared.
Baseball has no salary cap, we all know that. But it was the first league with free agency, which allowed the unholy scenario of a last place team one year to win the WS the next. Football is very close to that, if not already there.
Just be prepared for the Cardinals vs. the Jag's in next years SB. And nobody outside of Phoenix and Jacksonville will give a damn. They'll never be able to sell the idea of a "Mega-Game" world championship of pro football. Advertisers, television execs., owners and most of all the fans will be treated to no more exitement than a pre-season game with nothing really in play than two teams who guessed correctly at free agency. Better not buy any jersey's either, because the following year all the "star's" of the "big game" will be playing elsewhere!!
How much Chicago White Sox apparel, caps, and paraphenalia have you seen being worn. I travel a little bit. I've been around a little since October and can honestly say I haven't seen one White Sox hat or shirt being worn either here in Hawaii, Vegas, LA, etc...........
Now, if the Cubs won the WS, you and I both know you'd see nothing but Cubs stuff all over.
You don't have to be the head cashier at Walmart to figure out why this is.
Where were all these Red Sox fans before last October? Everywhere I look both here and abroad, I see nothing but Boston garb.
Why? Because the Red Sox are a sexy, fashionable, old time historical team with a rich (albeit undeserved) history. This White Sox win is the most un-relished in recent history. The ratings for the Astro-White Sox series was one of the worst in recent times, noone cared.
Baseball has no salary cap, we all know that. But it was the first league with free agency, which allowed the unholy scenario of a last place team one year to win the WS the next. Football is very close to that, if not already there.
Just be prepared for the Cardinals vs. the Jag's in next years SB. And nobody outside of Phoenix and Jacksonville will give a damn. They'll never be able to sell the idea of a "Mega-Game" world championship of pro football. Advertisers, television execs., owners and most of all the fans will be treated to no more exitement than a pre-season game with nothing really in play than two teams who guessed correctly at free agency. Better not buy any jersey's either, because the following year all the "star's" of the "big game" will be playing elsewhere!!
- H20
- Moderator
- Posts: 12231
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:42 pm
- MLB: Not a big fan of MLB.
- NBA: Celtics
- NFL: Falcons
- Location: Waimea, Big Island - Cold Country, LOVE IT
Getting rid of the cap wouldn't ensure that only the storied teams with history would have the best players, it will depend on how deep the pockets of the owners are. It could be the Ravens, or Jags, or Texans. The Yankees don't have the players they do because of the history of the Yankees, its because thier owner shells out the dough, he happens to own the Yankees.
Also guys sign long term contracts in the current system all the time, if you know your team and know how long a guy has left you can enjoy a jersey of his for a long time.
Also guys sign long term contracts in the current system all the time, if you know your team and know how long a guy has left you can enjoy a jersey of his for a long time.
- BKWarrior
- Hall of famer
- Posts: 2555
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:26 pm
- Location: Brooklyn,NY (but now at UW-Madison)
The Yanks created a history that people want to be a part of. And don't hate the Yankees, cause the are willing to spend to try and put out the best team they can, while teams like the Royals sit on their money, and the Marlins sell their best players every three years.
I HATE when people are haters of the Yankees because of money. Look at Boston! They had the second highest payroll, which was much more than anyone else outside of NY, and no one complained about them. Just goes to show you, when you are the best, and work at being the best, people will always be jealous and hateful towards you.
How much more money did the Ynaks spend than other teams, when they were dominating in the 20s? That's when our history began, and the prestige that comes with putting on the pinstripes, caused millions of kids to grow up dreaming of being a Yankee.
The blam should be placed on teams that have the resources, but don't use them. Look at them first, before hating on a team that is willing to use what they have, to attain success.
I HATE when people are haters of the Yankees because of money. Look at Boston! They had the second highest payroll, which was much more than anyone else outside of NY, and no one complained about them. Just goes to show you, when you are the best, and work at being the best, people will always be jealous and hateful towards you.
How much more money did the Ynaks spend than other teams, when they were dominating in the 20s? That's when our history began, and the prestige that comes with putting on the pinstripes, caused millions of kids to grow up dreaming of being a Yankee.
The blam should be placed on teams that have the resources, but don't use them. Look at them first, before hating on a team that is willing to use what they have, to attain success.
Forza Italia, campioni del mondo!
- H20
- Moderator
- Posts: 12231
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:42 pm
- MLB: Not a big fan of MLB.
- NBA: Celtics
- NFL: Falcons
- Location: Waimea, Big Island - Cold Country, LOVE IT
Not sure if that was meant for me but I agree with it. The owners who spend in a non-cap system have a better chance to succeed. I'm just saying that if the NFL where to get rid of the cap, there's no guarantee that only the owners of the most storied teams will want to spend the extra buck. It's a crap shoot, same as it is now. The difference is now the game is played more on the field than off it. To me thats the way it should be.
- BKWarrior
- Hall of famer
- Posts: 2555
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:26 pm
- Location: Brooklyn,NY (but now at UW-Madison)
It was meant for any Yankee haters out there, not to one person. I have to defend my hometown team, so yeah, I'm biased, I'll admit that.
I think, in the NFl, the Cowboys, Redskins, Raiders, and Packers would not hesitate to spend all they've got. But, then I look at teams like Arizona, San Francisco, New Orleans, the Texans, and I wonder.
Football is one game where the teams history doesn't seem to matter. How many players would rush to play in Green Bay or Buffalo?
I long for the days of the dynasty, Dallas (hate 'em though) San Francisco, Green Bay. Pittsburg, etc. Would be nice. I guess that begs the question, was NE the closest to dynasty that we're gonna get from now on?
I think, in the NFl, the Cowboys, Redskins, Raiders, and Packers would not hesitate to spend all they've got. But, then I look at teams like Arizona, San Francisco, New Orleans, the Texans, and I wonder.
Football is one game where the teams history doesn't seem to matter. How many players would rush to play in Green Bay or Buffalo?
I long for the days of the dynasty, Dallas (hate 'em though) San Francisco, Green Bay. Pittsburg, etc. Would be nice. I guess that begs the question, was NE the closest to dynasty that we're gonna get from now on?
Forza Italia, campioni del mondo!
You from NY City Warrior? I'm from Wilkes-Barre/Scranton PA and spent many weekends in the city.
Maybe it's because of where I'm from and the day and age of being there (1960-1980). Growing up around the Yankees, Steelers, etc..........and all the deep rooted sports heritage of the N.East makes one pine for the old days. The days of meaningfull rivalries, dynasties and those looking to knock off the perinnial champs. The lore of the Al Davis Raiders and what they once were for two decades. A time when an NFL team got better and good over time, climbed the playoff ladder over several years, finally win the Super Bowl, and taking several more years before becoming an average team again.
I can't stand it when, like in MLB, an NFL team goes 4-12 one year and goes to the SB the following year, and the third year goes back to 7-9. If you research the last half of the nineties and the last five years, you'll see more than a fair share of teams like this. The Falcons, the Ravens, the Panthers, Rams, Chargers, the 05' Bengals, etc........
I don't know, somehow I sleep better at night when the Bengals suck like they're supposed to, and the Raiders make the playoffs like they're supposed to. Maybe it's because I'm a lifelong Cowboy fan and think the universe is out of wack and the stars misaligned when the best team in the NFC are the Buccaneers and may be the Seahawks this year. Something just ain't right when I have to endure Seattle vs. Carolina after a long NFL season. It's very anticlimatic for me.
Maybe it's because of where I'm from and the day and age of being there (1960-1980). Growing up around the Yankees, Steelers, etc..........and all the deep rooted sports heritage of the N.East makes one pine for the old days. The days of meaningfull rivalries, dynasties and those looking to knock off the perinnial champs. The lore of the Al Davis Raiders and what they once were for two decades. A time when an NFL team got better and good over time, climbed the playoff ladder over several years, finally win the Super Bowl, and taking several more years before becoming an average team again.
I can't stand it when, like in MLB, an NFL team goes 4-12 one year and goes to the SB the following year, and the third year goes back to 7-9. If you research the last half of the nineties and the last five years, you'll see more than a fair share of teams like this. The Falcons, the Ravens, the Panthers, Rams, Chargers, the 05' Bengals, etc........
I don't know, somehow I sleep better at night when the Bengals suck like they're supposed to, and the Raiders make the playoffs like they're supposed to. Maybe it's because I'm a lifelong Cowboy fan and think the universe is out of wack and the stars misaligned when the best team in the NFC are the Buccaneers and may be the Seahawks this year. Something just ain't right when I have to endure Seattle vs. Carolina after a long NFL season. It's very anticlimatic for me.
-
- Starter
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 4:14 pm
- MLB: Braves
- NBA: Lakers
- NFL: Ravens
- Location: Aina Haina
- BKWarrior
- Hall of famer
- Posts: 2555
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:26 pm
- Location: Brooklyn,NY (but now at UW-Madison)
It's more popular, but we've developed more bandwagon fans. It's not the same. The Colts didn't have as many fans as they do not in their stadium back in the mid-90s. Same with St. Louis, Tanba Bay etc..There are few teams that have true fans, Dallas, GB, NYJ, NYG, Buffalo, Pittsburg, Cleveland.
Some of the best football was played during the days of the dynastys. We haven't had another Marino, Elway, Montana type since Favre. LT is good, but is he yet a Sanders or Smith, or Payton?
We haven't had a Deion Sanders, or Darrell Green type for a while.
The point is, the memories aren't the same, and the game has become too business like and less sports like. Especially with all the sponsers everywhere, more commercials, mosr ref stoppage. I hate replay by the way. I've been screwed by replay with the Jets before, but I still hate it!
Some of the best football was played during the days of the dynastys. We haven't had another Marino, Elway, Montana type since Favre. LT is good, but is he yet a Sanders or Smith, or Payton?
We haven't had a Deion Sanders, or Darrell Green type for a while.
The point is, the memories aren't the same, and the game has become too business like and less sports like. Especially with all the sponsers everywhere, more commercials, mosr ref stoppage. I hate replay by the way. I've been screwed by replay with the Jets before, but I still hate it!
Forza Italia, campioni del mondo!