Which is more important in the NFL

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
85,920
Reaction score
27,015
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
 
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
85,920
Reaction score
27,015
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
160,898
Reaction score
23,478
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
OP
Grampa Murked U

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
85,920
Reaction score
27,015
Points
2,275
Location
Kansas City
Back to ignore with you I guess. I had hoped that being this is the SPORTS forum that the political stupidity would be left elsewhere.
 

HereWeGoAgain

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
70,337
Reaction score
19,809
Points
2,210
Location
Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Not sure how else you're going to go about finding out who's best.
It's not like they can play a series like the NBA.
 

Mad Scientist

Feels Good!
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
24,196
Reaction score
5,424
Points
270
The only "talent" the NFL cares about are the writers who script the games.
 

Unkotare

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
99,404
Reaction score
12,512
Points
2,180
Talent and hard work produce luck.
 

Montrovant

Fuzzy bears!
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
21,897
Reaction score
4,890
Points
290
Location
A Picturesque Apocalypse
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Not sure how else you're going to go about finding out who's best.
It's not like they can play a series like the NBA.
That's my one real problem with the NFL. I much prefer a best of series.

On the other hand, one-and-done is more exciting for the casual fan.
 

HereWeGoAgain

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
70,337
Reaction score
19,809
Points
2,210
Location
Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Not sure how else you're going to go about finding out who's best.
It's not like they can play a series like the NBA.
That's my one real problem with the NFL. I much prefer a best of series.

On the other hand, one-and-done is more exciting for the casual fan.
I'd prefer a series myself,but there's no way the players would hold up to that many more games.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,537
Reaction score
17,088
Points
2,180
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Well, what one stat (besides the score) that decides the outcome of a plurality of NFL games is second half turnovers. Whether that is attributable to talent or luck is another discussion. I tend to think it is luck of the team getting the ball whether the team with the ball is turning it over or not. There is not a skill set that strips the ball from a carrier; Otherwise there would be a lot more turnovers in every game.

As for the playoff system, I too think that there is a better system. A UEFA system by which you play one home game at each team's home stadium and let point differential determine the winner with away points being the deciding factor would yield a better measure of which team is better. The Super Bowl would still be a one-off game.

For example, when the Patriots beat the Colts 45-7 at Foxboro, the following week a game would be played at Indy. If the Colts would have to score at least 45 points to win the game (if they held the Patriots to zero). So an identical score of 45-7 would go to tie-breakers with both teams having amassed 45 points at home and 7 on the road. However, if the Patriots scored 14 points, just 7 points more, the Colts would have to score at least 8 more since the Patriots scored more at their opponent's stadium.

 

Montrovant

Fuzzy bears!
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
21,897
Reaction score
4,890
Points
290
Location
A Picturesque Apocalypse
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Well, what one stat (besides the score) that decides the outcome of a plurality of NFL games is second half turnovers. Whether that is attributable to talent or luck is another discussion. I tend to think it is luck of the team getting the ball whether the team with the ball is turning it over or not. There is not a skill set that strips the ball from a carrier; Otherwise there would be a lot more turnovers in every game.

As for the playoff system, I too think that there is a better system. A UEFA system by which you play one home game at each team's home stadium and let point differential determine the winner with away points being the deciding factor would yield a better measure of which team is better. The Super Bowl would still be a one-off game.

For example, when the Patriots beat the Colts 45-7 at Foxboro, the following week a game would be played at Indy. If the Colts would have to score at least 45 points to win the game (if they held the Patriots to zero). So an identical score of 45-7 would go to tie-breakers with both teams having amassed 45 points at home and 7 on the road. However, if the Patriots scored 14 points, just 7 points more, the Colts would have to score at least 8 more since the Patriots scored more at their opponent's stadium.
You still have the same problem there as a straight best-of series. The NFL won't play that many playoff games. Too much time involved (potentially 3 weeks per playoff round) and simply too many games with too much injury risk.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,537
Reaction score
17,088
Points
2,180
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Well, what one stat (besides the score) that decides the outcome of a plurality of NFL games is second half turnovers. Whether that is attributable to talent or luck is another discussion. I tend to think it is luck of the team getting the ball whether the team with the ball is turning it over or not. There is not a skill set that strips the ball from a carrier; Otherwise there would be a lot more turnovers in every game.

As for the playoff system, I too think that there is a better system. A UEFA system by which you play one home game at each team's home stadium and let point differential determine the winner with away points being the deciding factor would yield a better measure of which team is better. The Super Bowl would still be a one-off game.

For example, when the Patriots beat the Colts 45-7 at Foxboro, the following week a game would be played at Indy. If the Colts would have to score at least 45 points to win the game (if they held the Patriots to zero). So an identical score of 45-7 would go to tie-breakers with both teams having amassed 45 points at home and 7 on the road. However, if the Patriots scored 14 points, just 7 points more, the Colts would have to score at least 8 more since the Patriots scored more at their opponent's stadium.
You still have the same problem there as a straight best-of series. The NFL won't play that many playoff games. Too much time involved (potentially 3 weeks per playoff round) and simply too many games with too much injury risk.

It would be a max of 2 games; not sure why you think it would take 3 weeks. If Baltimore visited Oakland and beat them 7-0 then in the following week, Oakland visited Baltimore and beat them 8-0 the Raiders advance based on road points scored. It would add excitement to the proceedings since OAK would be forced to go for two due to the points being the determinant. If Baltimore visited Oakland and beat them 7-0 then in the following week, Oakland visited Baltimore and beat them 7-0 you would then have to go to tie breakers such as total yardage.

You're right about the possibility of injury but it would be better (IMHO) to have players injured playing for something instead of meaningless games in November when you are already guaranteed a playoff spot. The league seems to be about getting the most teams into the playoffs it can and not assuring us that the best teams advance.
 

Unkotare

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
99,404
Reaction score
12,512
Points
2,180
[ The league seems to be about getting the most teams into the playoffs it can and not assuring us that the best teams advance.
The two best teams did make it to the Superbowl.
 

Montrovant

Fuzzy bears!
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
21,897
Reaction score
4,890
Points
290
Location
A Picturesque Apocalypse
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Well, what one stat (besides the score) that decides the outcome of a plurality of NFL games is second half turnovers. Whether that is attributable to talent or luck is another discussion. I tend to think it is luck of the team getting the ball whether the team with the ball is turning it over or not. There is not a skill set that strips the ball from a carrier; Otherwise there would be a lot more turnovers in every game.

As for the playoff system, I too think that there is a better system. A UEFA system by which you play one home game at each team's home stadium and let point differential determine the winner with away points being the deciding factor would yield a better measure of which team is better. The Super Bowl would still be a one-off game.

For example, when the Patriots beat the Colts 45-7 at Foxboro, the following week a game would be played at Indy. If the Colts would have to score at least 45 points to win the game (if they held the Patriots to zero). So an identical score of 45-7 would go to tie-breakers with both teams having amassed 45 points at home and 7 on the road. However, if the Patriots scored 14 points, just 7 points more, the Colts would have to score at least 8 more since the Patriots scored more at their opponent's stadium.
You still have the same problem there as a straight best-of series. The NFL won't play that many playoff games. Too much time involved (potentially 3 weeks per playoff round) and simply too many games with too much injury risk.

It would be a max of 2 games; not sure why you think it would take 3 weeks. If Baltimore visited Oakland and beat them 7-0 then in the following week, Oakland visited Baltimore and beat them 8-0 the Raiders advance based on road points scored. It would add excitement to the proceedings since OAK would be forced to go for two due to the points being the determinant. If Baltimore visited Oakland and beat them 7-0 then in the following week, Oakland visited Baltimore and beat them 7-0 you would then have to go to tie breakers such as total yardage.

You're right about the possibility of injury but it would be better (IMHO) to have players injured playing for something instead of meaningless games in November when you are already guaranteed a playoff spot. The league seems to be about getting the most teams into the playoffs it can and not assuring us that the best teams advance.
Oh, I thought the tiebreaker would be a third game.

This is even worse. There's no way the viewing public will go for a system that might come down to statistical tie breakers. That is the worst possibility.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,537
Reaction score
17,088
Points
2,180
Talent
Or
Luck


I think they are about equal. Talent will usually get you to post season but then luck becomes a HUGE factor.

I don't think the current playoff system allows the best to rise to the top.
Well, what one stat (besides the score) that decides the outcome of a plurality of NFL games is second half turnovers. Whether that is attributable to talent or luck is another discussion. I tend to think it is luck of the team getting the ball whether the team with the ball is turning it over or not. There is not a skill set that strips the ball from a carrier; Otherwise there would be a lot more turnovers in every game.

As for the playoff system, I too think that there is a better system. A UEFA system by which you play one home game at each team's home stadium and let point differential determine the winner with away points being the deciding factor would yield a better measure of which team is better. The Super Bowl would still be a one-off game.

For example, when the Patriots beat the Colts 45-7 at Foxboro, the following week a game would be played at Indy. If the Colts would have to score at least 45 points to win the game (if they held the Patriots to zero). So an identical score of 45-7 would go to tie-breakers with both teams having amassed 45 points at home and 7 on the road. However, if the Patriots scored 14 points, just 7 points more, the Colts would have to score at least 8 more since the Patriots scored more at their opponent's stadium.
You still have the same problem there as a straight best-of series. The NFL won't play that many playoff games. Too much time involved (potentially 3 weeks per playoff round) and simply too many games with too much injury risk.

It would be a max of 2 games; not sure why you think it would take 3 weeks. If Baltimore visited Oakland and beat them 7-0 then in the following week, Oakland visited Baltimore and beat them 8-0 the Raiders advance based on road points scored. It would add excitement to the proceedings since OAK would be forced to go for two due to the points being the determinant. If Baltimore visited Oakland and beat them 7-0 then in the following week, Oakland visited Baltimore and beat them 7-0 you would then have to go to tie breakers such as total yardage.

You're right about the possibility of injury but it would be better (IMHO) to have players injured playing for something instead of meaningless games in November when you are already guaranteed a playoff spot. The league seems to be about getting the most teams into the playoffs it can and not assuring us that the best teams advance.
Oh, I thought the tiebreaker would be a third game.

This is even worse. There's no way the viewing public will go for a system that might come down to statistical tie breakers. That is the worst possibility.
I see your inhibition but they actually do now when teams have the same record for seeding purposes. Irregardless, there is almost zero chance of two games having the exact same score with opposite teams coming out on top.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top