Dragonborn10 Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Exception that proves the rule... And oh yeah the SuperBowl winner didn't make the playoffs so change is a comin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Sarcasm, yes? Maybe. Maybe not... I have been driving people nuts with this for years... I think the cap hurts the game. Look at the few different teams that are winning. It is a fact that different teams win more in baseball. Capped sports, IMO protect the big markets from themselves... While the sound small markets chronically go frugal and come in way low. It is a one way street. I am all for a cap. BUT, it has to be set at whatever the lowest teams wants to pay. Hockey especially. Totally crazy and never happen... So, it be best that they totally uncap the game(s). Exception that proves the rule... And oh yeah the SuperBowl winner didn't make the playoffs so change is a comin... Giants were a sucky 9-7 last year... Worst record ever to win a Super Bowl... They shouldn't have made the playoffs last year! Stanley Cup: Kings, worst team outta the 8 in the West. I will believe change when we start seeing the smaller markets prevail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) The playoffs were expanded to 12 teams (from 10) in 1990. Seems like any study should go back no farther than that year. I'm not gonna dig up the link but there was a recent study which showed that there was a pattern of 5 new playoff teams each year. Okay. I dug it up: http://profootballta...ayoff-turnover/ "In every year since 1996, at least five of the teams that made the playoffs the prior year ended up on the outside looking in." Edited January 12, 2013 by San Jose Bills Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchmurraydowntown Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 You're killin me Smalls..... Guess what second place gets??? A set of steak knives. LOL, third place / you're fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 The playoffs were expanded to 12 teams (from 10) in 1990. Seems like any study should go back no farther than that year. I'm not gonna dig up the link but there was a recent study which showed that there was a pattern of 5 new playoff teams each year. Okay. I dug it up: http://profootballta...ayoff-turnover/ "In every year since 1996, at least five of the teams that made the playoffs the prior year ended up on the outside looking in." That is all well and dandy... BUT in the end, who is going to Disney World? The same old rerun teams... On the other take the monstrosity you call the Yankees... Yeah, they get in every year... BUT they aren't winning it all. Obviously, other teams are winning it all in baseball... So they must be getting in. I would rather have it that way, than the lip service and seeing the same old big market teams claim the prize in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchmurraydowntown Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 The playoffs were expanded to 12 teams (from 10) in 1990. Seems like any study should go back no farther than that year. I'm not gonna dig up the link but there was a recent study which showed that there was a pattern of 5 new playoff teams each year. Okay. I dug it up: http://profootballta...ayoff-turnover/ "In every year since 1996, at least five of the teams that made the playoffs the prior year ended up on the outside looking in." Great dig BB, it shows how much it has changed in that short a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 The parity question is interesting, and not clear cut. One can point to upheaval in the NFL, turnover in playoff teams, but in the end less than half of the existing teams have won more than half of the super bowls ever played, and more than half of the existing teams have never won a super bowl at all. That pattern is likely to hold true this year, since of the eight teams still alive, five (Pats, Broncos, Niners, Packers, and Ravens) have already won a Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 That is all well and dandy... BUT in the end, who is going to Disney World? The same old rerun teams... On the other take the monstrosity you call the Yankees... Yeah, they get in every year... BUT they aren't winning it all. Obviously, other teams are winning it all in baseball... So they must be getting in. I would rather have it that way, than the lip service and seeing the same old big market teams claim the prize in the end. I mean... We've seen the small market packers and saints, the colts, Baltimore, the giants and steelers and pats all win in the last ten years or so? Seems like the cap keeps parity and the teams churning but its one tier for SB contenders (franchise qb) and another for playoff contenders (no qb) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts