Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

OPINION Would “parity”die in the NFL if we eliminated the draft?

AP2.0 said:
ok man
Click to expand...
So as a fan why does it matter to you if the cowboys are in NFC South or any other division? So they can play the Saints? What’s a reason that needs to be changed cuz I think them and like Indy are the only ones in a strange spot
 
Revolver Ocelot said:
And y'all keep bringing up parity. What parity?

4 teams have never been to the SB

8 more have never won a SB

And teams like Dallas, WFT, Miami, & NYJ are all 25 and more years since they've either been or won a SB.


What Parity????????
Click to expand...

The Eagles just won their first Super Bowl. The Chiefs just won their first SB in 50 years.
Bucs just won their first SB in just under 20 years.
Falcons choked away a 28-3 lead going after their 1st ever SB win.

That's in the last 5 years.
 
Hellczar said:
So as a fan why does it matter to you if the cowboys are in NFC South or any other division? So they can play the Saints? What’s a reason that needs to be changed cuz I think them and like Indy are the only ones in a strange spot
Click to expand...
This not the thread for this

I'm too lazy to bump the actual thread

But there's nothing I'm going to be able to say to persuade your pov so I'll do is both a solid and just drop it
 
Bow to Royalty said:
The Eagles just won their first Super Bowl. The Chiefs just won their first SB in 50 years.
Bucs just won their first SB in just under 20 years.
Falcons choked away a 28-3 lead going after their 1st ever SB win.

That's in the last 5 years.
Click to expand...

He acting like different teams it in the championship games and a play or two away from being the championship

That’s parity.

Ain’t dominating first round sweep but the top 2 seeds for each conference lol
 
Bow to Royalty said:
The Eagles just won their first Super Bowl. The Chiefs just won their first SB in 50 years.
Bucs just won their first SB in just under 20 years.
Falcons choked away a 28-3 lead going after their 1st ever SB win.

That's in the last 5 years.
Click to expand...
Why are you counting the falcons. They didn't win so you shouldn't include them. And the larger point is while those franchises have won their first one, that still doesn't negate the fact 4 teams have won the bulk over the past 20 seasons
 
Dwayne said:
He acting like different teams it in the championship games and a play or two away from being the championship

That’s parity.

Ain’t dominating first round sweep but the top 2 seeds for each conference lol
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is disregarding this but the fact remains they didn't win which still speaks to the lack of variation when it comes to teams who actually win it.

The conversation has never been about parity when it comes to making the playoffs
 
Bucs
49ers
Rams
Eagles
Falcons
Carolina
Seahawks

Last 7 NFC teams in the Super Bowl and was literally almost won. Competitive games and that’s called parity

Draft played major roles for them teams.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
The Eagles just won their first Super Bowl. The Chiefs just won their first SB in 50 years.
Bucs just won their first SB in just under 20 years.
Falcons choked away a 28-3 lead going after their 1st ever SB win.

That's in the last 5 years.
Click to expand...

And the Eagles, Chiefs and Bucs wasn't teams I was talking bout w/ that post either(notice how there's still a buncha teams left......"riight")

So that response was pointless.
 
Next time we have one of these threads, we need to define the definition of the topic at hand
 
AP2.0 said:
Why are you counting the falcons. They didn't win so you shouldn't include them. And the larger point is while those franchises have won their first one, that still doesn't negate the fact 4 teams have won the bulk over the past 20 seasons
Click to expand...

So it's not parity because they were only NFC Champs?
 
Revolver Ocelot said:
And the Eagles, Chiefs and Bucs wasn't teams I was talking bout w/ that post either(notice how there's still a buncha teams left......"riight")

So that response was pointless.
Click to expand...

Well let's look at everyone that's won since 2000.

  1. Rams
  2. Ravens
  3. Pats
  4. Bucs
  5. Pats
  6. Pats
  7. Steelers
  8. Colts
  9. Giants
  10. Steelers
  11. Saints
  12. Packers
  13. Giants
  14. Ravens
  15. Seahawks
  16. Pats
  17. Broncos
  18. Pats
  19. Eagles
  20. Pats
  21. Chiefs
  22. Bucs
That's 13 different teams in 22 years. That's not super repetitive.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
Well let's look at everyone that's won since 2000.

  1. Rams
  2. Ravens
  3. Pats
  4. Bucs
  5. Pats
  6. Pats
  7. Steelers
  8. Colts
  9. Giants
  10. Steelers
  11. Saints
  12. Packers
  13. Giants
  14. Ravens
  15. Seahawks
  16. Pats
  17. Broncos
  18. Pats
  19. Eagles
  20. Pats
  21. Chiefs
  22. Bucs
That's 13 different teams in 22 years. That's not super repetitive.
Click to expand...

And that’s with the Pats being an extreme outlier
 
Bow to Royalty said:
Well let's look at everyone that's won since 2000.

  1. Rams
  2. Ravens
  3. Pats
  4. Bucs
  5. Pats
  6. Pats
  7. Steelers
  8. Colts
  9. Giants
  10. Steelers
  11. Saints
  12. Packers
  13. Giants
  14. Ravens
  15. Seahawks
  16. Pats
  17. Broncos
  18. Pats
  19. Eagles
  20. Pats
  21. Chiefs
  22. Bucs
That's 13 different teams in 22 years. That's not super repetitive.
Click to expand...

Yup. 5 of those teams are responsible for 2 or more.

Only 3 teams are 1st time winners.

And there's still 19 more that didn't!!

But "parity".............. :hahaha:
 
Revolver Ocelot said:
Yup. 5 of those teams are responsible for 2 or more.

Only 3 teams are 1st time winners.

And there's still 19 more that didn't!!

But "parity".............. :hahaha:
Click to expand...

Bruh, I don't even know where to start with this nonsense, haha.

There have been 54 super Bowls for 32 teams. You're not gonna keep getting first time winners. The Colts and Chiefs had over 30 years between wins.

And your first time winners count is off.

Ravens
Bucs
Patriots
Seahawks
Eagles
Saints
Rams

Since it's more than twice as many first time winners as you thought, you're ready to reconsider now right?

And "there's still 19 more that didn't!!". That's 22 super bowls and there are 32 teams. A minimum of 10 teams weren't gonna win one no matter what.

You shame snickering Kobe with that post.
 
Last edited:
Hustlelitó said:
No it’s not. The same 4-6 teams in the championship games and SB.

If you let me pick 8 teams (4 from each conference) and I give you the other 24 teams bet money I’d pick the super bowl matchup.
Click to expand...

8 teams is 1/4 of the league you're picking. And you predicted the Cowboys to be in the SB last year.
 
Hustlelitó said:
You’d still have 3/4 of the league since “every team has a chance to win the SB” you should be good.
Click to expand...

@AP2.0 is right. We need to define parity. Y'all are acting like if every team doesn't have equal odds of winning the super bowl each year, and each team doesn't win the SB once every 32 years it isn't parity.

How accurate do you have to be with that pick 8 team strategy to think there's no parity?
 
AP2.0 said:
aight so this might be kinda long winded

i really need to eat but fuck it lol

so let me get a couple of things out of the way b/c for some reason this keeps being brought up

Veterans:

Under this make-believe scenario, the veterans would be treated the same way they are currently being treated. Some will continue to get paid top dollar b/c of their play, some will be phased out due to attrition. The current draft situation has no bearing on those players and under this make-believe situation, that will continue to be the case.

For those who keep thinking well teams will just get cheap with talent, that's not going to happen as you still need to fill out a roster. You cant fill out a gameday roster with just draft picks. Again, it would be essentially the exact same as the current draft system where a player is drafted by a team then compete for a roster spot.

Rookies:

In my scenario, a pool of money is used to get the talent. Read my previous post on this. I'm not typing all of that again.

You can draft as many players as you are able to negotiate with using the pool of money. If you blow your wad on two players, tough titty. If you try to be cheap and just low ball your way to signing a bunch of depth. Tough titty as those dudes might not even make the roster, but the money you bid on them is guaranteed. So no take-backs. You cant bid on a player and if he doesnt make your gameday roster, try to recoup that money. It's his. If you cut him, its his and he is free to sign with another team. The player gets to interview the team instead of the team interviewing the player.

Not every prospect will be coveted by every franchise based on need, fit, current roster construction, etc.. JUST LIKE THE CURRENT DRAFT SYSTEM.

If a team JUST drafted a qb, blew their wad on that player in one year, you really think they would do the exact same thing the following year?

Now that I think about it, the model that Im using in baseball does have an actual draft for the american born players and I think what im suggesting is for international prospects in baseball, but fuck it...lets get crazy...blow the shit up altogether and just make it so that there is essentially no draft and the teams have to compete with each other for the rights to prospects.
Click to expand...
This could work

puts a lot more onus on scouting dept and GM and the front office as a whole than it already is

in world without the draft being so lucrative for the NFL this could work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top