2017 AFC Playoffs

rass · Post by **rass** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:31 pm

Johnnie wrote:"I don't know how you beat father time ... He spends $350k a year on his body." - Collinsworth on Harrison.

Drugs, Chris. The answer is drugs.

"Tom Brady's arm is as good as it was his rookie year."

Answer #1 is Simms sucks.

Answer #2?

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:36 pm

Oooh. Oooh. Are you alluding to drugs!?

rass · Post by **rass** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:38 pm

Johnnie wrote:Oooh. Oooh. Are you alluding to drugs!?

I think I'm alluding to you alluding to drugs.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:40 pm

rass wrote: Answer #1 is Simms sucks.

He is very good at telling you what you are seeing in slow mo.

rass · Post by **rass** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:49 pm

Pruitt wrote:
rass wrote: Answer #1 is Simms sucks.
He is very good at telling you what you are seeing in slow mo.

Yeah.

And I thought I was kidding wih Johnnie all evening long, and even went out first my way to couch that last comment behind a Simms insult, but he still came across a little more sensitive than I expected.

HaulCitgo · Post by **HaulCitgo** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:50 pm

Gonna trick the kid into wearing his 12 jersey to school tomorrow. Might not make it home once he realizes.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:55 pm

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:14 pm

Bizarrely, my daughter is a Patriots fan and my son is a Falcons fan.

And I am still a Bills fan.

EnochRoot · Post by **EnochRoot** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:43 am

Something something parity in football...

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:20 am

EnochRoot wrote:Something something parity in football...

Socialism doesn't work.

I mean what's the goal when parity in football is introduced? 32 8-8 records? It's always been a laughable proclamation.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:42 am

I don't think that was the goal.

Joe K · Post by **Joe K** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:31 am

In fairness, there has been a lot of parity on the NFC side ever since the end of the 1990s Cowboys/49ers/Packers "trivalry". It's just that the AFC has seen Brady, Manning or Roethlisberger make 13 of the last 14 Superbowls.

HaulCitgo · Post by **HaulCitgo** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:59 am

Pats played great last night. Not as excited as I could be because this is becoming a bit routine but that was a hell of a game. Held their shit and kept the pressure on til the dam broke. Easily could have been in a tight game late but basically no mistakes and didnt let em off the mat when probably 25-30 teams would have. Proud to be a fan.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:01 pm

mister d wrote:I don't think that was the goal.

Then please expand on what the goal actually is. Because to me, "parity" in this context means "everyone gets a turn." The definition of parity is "the state or condition of being equal, especially regarding status or pay." So if the object isn't some Harrison Bergeron level implication, it's a facade that will never exist.

Joe K wrote:In fairness, there has been a lot of parity on the NFC side ever since the end of the 1990s Cowboys/49ers/Packers "trivalry". It's just that the AFC has seen Brady, Manning or Roethlisberger make 13 of the last 14 Superbowls.

Eventually the other two will retire. So one day, pending there's an influx of managerial and athletic talent to the Not Patriots or Not Steelers, "parity" will happen.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:02 pm

Johnnie wrote:
mister d wrote:I don't think that was the goal.
Then please expand on what the goal actually is. Because to me, "parity" in this context means "everyone gets a turn." The definition of parity is "the state or condition of being equal, especially regarding status or pay." So if the object isn't some Harrison Bergeron level implication, it's a facade that will never exist.

Joe K wrote:In fairness, there has been a lot of parity on the NFC side ever since the end of the 1990s Cowboys/49ers/Packers "trivalry". It's just that the AFC has seen Brady, Manning or Roethlisberger make 13 of the last 14 Superbowls.
Eventually the other two will retire. So one day, pending there's an influx of managerial and athletic talent to the Not Patriots or Not Steelers, "parity" will happen.

That's the way i understand it, too. So when the Browns' turn comes around it should last for like 19 seasons. Looking forward to it.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:12 pm

Johnnie wrote:
mister d wrote:I don't think that was the goal.
Then please expand on what the goal actually is. Because to me, "parity" in this context means "everyone gets a turn." The definition of parity is "the state or condition of being equal, especially regarding status or pay." So if the object isn't some Harrison Bergeron level implication, it's a facade that will never exist.

You'd say I was mocking the point if I said "does the league want every game to end in a tie???", right? Its not aiming for 8-8 x 32, its aiming for a lack of inherent advantages and a relatively clear path to competing even if you currently aren't. In MLB, the Yankees have a massive advantage on Oakland and will in 5 years or 10 years or 20 years unless the rules are changed. Granted, the NFL's way around this is with the salary cap (I have no issues there) and their one-sided contract rule (I do), but that's how you get parity (and reduced expenses). The Patriots advantage isn't inherent to their franchise, its self-created, and they'll lose it as soon as Brady gets cut, Belichick retires and they stop cheating.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:21 pm

Johnnie wrote:
mister d wrote:I don't think that was the goal.
Then please expand on what the goal actually is. Because to me, "parity" in this context means "everyone gets a turn." The definition of parity is "the state or condition of being equal, especially regarding status or pay." So if the object isn't some Harrison Bergeron level implication, it's a facade that will never exist.

Joe K wrote:In fairness, there has been a lot of parity on the NFC side ever since the end of the 1990s Cowboys/49ers/Packers "trivalry". It's just that the AFC has seen Brady, Manning or Roethlisberger make 13 of the last 14 Superbowls.
Eventually the other two will retire. So one day, pending there's an influx of managerial and athletic talent to the Not Patriots or Not Steelers, "parity" will happen.

It's not "parity" per se, it's more of a shifting in the balance of power.

It's precisely because of the fact that the game is played by athletes, and the teams are run by humans of wildly varying levels of skill that true parity will never be achieved. Sure, teams will get strong for a few years (see the Bills of the late 1980s to mid 1990s), but once the GMs move on and the Hall of Famers retire, those teams regress.

There's a reason why teams like the Browns, Falcons, Saints, Rams, Lions, Bengals and others have all experienced decade plus runs of futility in recent memory.

DaveInSeattle · Post by **DaveInSeattle** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:50 pm

Brady is either an Alien, or those magic pajamas he's shilling for really do work. Isn't it time for his body to finally break down like Manning's did?

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:55 pm

DaveInSeattle wrote:Brady is either an Alien, or those magic pajamas he's shilling for really do work. Isn't it time for his body to finally break down like Manning's did?

The lack of a neck fusion surgery plays a role

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:18 pm

The point is to allow for hope in small-market traditionally weak franchises. I don't want the NFL to be like the Premiership, where you probably have no shot if you don't have a spendthrift billionaire owner.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:21 pm

Yeah, that's why I'm pro-salary cap. I think they're implemented all wrong in all sports, but I see the perceived necessity.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:22 pm

Brontoburglar wrote:
DaveInSeattle wrote:Brady is either an Alien, or those magic pajamas he's shilling for really do work. Isn't it time for his body to finally break down like Manning's did?
The lack of a neck fusion surgery plays a role

Plus we agree Belichick is brilliant enough to stage other scandals that would leave the NFL wary/terrified of punishing Brady for a failed test when it would be so easy to just look the other way.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:25 pm

Brontoburglar wrote:
DaveInSeattle wrote:Brady is either an Alien, or those magic pajamas he's shilling for really do work. Isn't it time for his body to finally break down like Manning's did?
The lack of a neck fusion surgery plays a role

I think he also had shoulder problems, bursa problems, and plantar fasciitis.

I fully expect something to happen to Brady sooner rather than later though.

Joe K · Post by **Joe K** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:34 pm

mister d wrote:
Brontoburglar wrote:
DaveInSeattle wrote:Brady is either an Alien, or those magic pajamas he's shilling for really do work. Isn't it time for his body to finally break down like Manning's did?
The lack of a neck fusion surgery plays a role
Plus we agree Belichick is brilliant enough to stage other scandals that would leave the NFL wary/terrified of punishing Brady for a failed test when it would be so easy to just look the other way.

Even though Brady's suspension was upheld, I can't believe how many media members fell for the Patriots' PR campaign to portray themselves as the victims. The Deflator/diet "explanation" alone should have made everyone laugh at the team's defense. But now, even if they get caught cheating for a third time, the league will probably be very reluctant to impose any punishment.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:35 pm

As far as the parity thing, it's clearly a misnomer that hasn't been clarified. I'm with all of you that each team follows the same rules and it's up to each to operate within them.

It just seemed like the inference contained within the posts upthread indicates that the Patriots were benefiting from parity issues. That isn't the case.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:37 pm

"Stage other scandals."

Good grief. That dude must reside in so many people's heads.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:43 pm

I was just doing a Google image search on "Buffalo Bills and parity" to come up with something bitterly humorous to post here and I found this...

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:53 pm

Johnnie wrote:"Stage other scandals."

Good grief. That dude must reside in so many people's heads.

If you have the ability to step back, that response is exactly why people mock Patriots fans.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:56 pm

Johnnie wrote:It just seemed like the inference contained within the posts upthread indicates that the Patriots were benefiting from parity issues. That isn't the case.

I want to think about this one more. I think they might be benefiting, not in any sort of devious way, but where if you have the two most important things in place and stable (QB + "management structure"), a league that attempts parity works to your advantage. Like the Jets can't just go out and spend $200MM (or whatever "wow, that's insane given the current NFL salary cap" would be) to close the gap.

L-Jam3 · Post by **L-Jam3** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:59 pm

Salary control. That's why there's a salary cap. Artificially tamping down wages.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:01 pm

mister d wrote:
Johnnie wrote:"Stage other scandals."

Good grief. That dude must reside in so many people's heads.
If you have the ability to step back, that response is exactly why people mock Patriots fans.

Dude, you just implied that Belichick is such an exceptional mastermind that he can fabricate something to throw off the NFL from further punishing the Patriots if Brady tested positive for something.

But my response feeds a stereotype of Pats fans? Am I just not picking up sarcasm?

Joe K · Post by **Joe K** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:05 pm

mister d wrote:
Johnnie wrote:It just seemed like the inference contained within the posts upthread indicates that the Patriots were benefiting from parity issues. That isn't the case.
I want to think about this one more. I think they might be benefiting, not in any sort of devious way, but where if you have the two most important things in place and stable (QB + "management structure"), a league that attempts parity works to your advantage. Like the Jets can't just go out and spend $200MM (or whatever "wow, that's insane given the current NFL salary cap" would be) to close the gap.

Where teams really get a huge leg up is if they can draft a QB who can play at a championship level while still on a rookie contract. Then you can spend substantially more on other positions than the other contenders. That's how the Seahawks got so good from 2012-2014 and why the Cowboys should be damn good for the next few years. Rookie contracts had been getting a bit ridiculous prior to the rookie scale getting implemented but now with that limit in place it's just a massive edge to draft a Wilson or Prescott.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:06 pm

Johnnie wrote:
mister d wrote:
Johnnie wrote:"Stage other scandals."

Good grief. That dude must reside in so many people's heads.
If you have the ability to step back, that response is exactly why people mock Patriots fans.
Dude, you just implied that Belichick is such an exceptional mastermind that he can fabricate something to throw off the NFL from further punishing the Patriots if Brady tested positive for something.

But my response feeds a stereotype of Pats fans? Am I just not picking up sarcasm?

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:17 pm

The salary cap is collectively bargained, and it is amazing that of the four major sports, the players in the most popular, most dangerous sport have the least player-friendly labor agreement.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:20 pm

FACT: 31 NFL fanbases are relatively good at picking up sarcasm

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:27 pm

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:30 pm

Haaaa yes, parity is 32 8-8 teams and everybody getting a turn.

NE fans are in their own heads.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:50 pm

sancarlos wrote:The salary cap is collectively bargained, and it is amazing that of the four major sports, the players in the most popular, most dangerous sport have the least player-friendly labor agreement.

Hard to hold out against billionaires, especially when the majority of your workforce isn't making that much.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:57 pm

And half of them would be risking like 25% of their career span on a half year holdout/lockout.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:08 pm

Nothing will happen until the star players care. If Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning had all lit up before week 1 last year, there would be no more weed rule. They are the ones that have the power, leverage and financial wherewithal to change anything. Tommy Lefttackle doesn't.