Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,585
    Rep Power
    145

    HUb's thoughts on parity

    Is parity really the right idea for the NFL? Whatever happened to survival of the fittest? Why can't we have a more gladiatorial Darwinism (which btw has taken on a new socio-economic connotation in terms like "survival of the fittest" that Darwin never intended....but I digress) spirit in this league. On the field, it's dog-eat-dog, mano-a-mano, the strongest survive, only the good die young (no wait, that was a Billy Joel song). Yet, after the dust settles, it's the weakest teams that are rewarded with the highest draft picks.

    Should the weakest teams be rewarded with such? For those that like the idea of parity, the answer is a resounding YES!

    However, this same parity establishes a surreal race to see who can fall the farthest. For example, the only time you hear about teams like the Texans, the niners, the Jets, or the Packers is in, what has come to be known as, the "Reggie Bush Sweepstakes". Think about that for a minute. The winner of the RBS will be the team that performs the worst!

    Now, of course, there is validity in the statement that the draft is a crap shoot, so it doesn't matter. However, if the Colts had lost the "Peyton Manning Sweepstakes", Ryan Leaf would be wearing the horse-shoe. Is the draft a crap shoot? You bet. However, don't you wanna roll the dice before all the good numbers dry up?

    And of course, there are the cynics who believe that draft order doesn't matter, their team will either pick great or pick poorly regardless of where they draft. The truth is most teams pick both good and bad selections along the way.

    So having said all this, are there other ways to go about this........maybe even at the cost of LESS parity? For example, what about:

    1. Using a lottery for the worst 8 or 10 or 12 teams, and using record for the rest.
    2. Or cutting out the middle man, and using a lottery for all 32 teams.
    3. How about pulling one from the world of fantasy football, and using a serpentine draft?

    Just some thoughts on parity, and I would love for you to share yours.

    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  2. #2
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    It does have a way of keeping things even. If we didn't have a salary cap, the whiners and cowboys would probably be battling every year for the Super Bowl. And just because you get the top draft choice three or four years in a row doesn't equate to success quickly, look at the Bengals.

  3. #3
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,612
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    The thing I'd like to see is a rookie cap. That way, we'd avoid holdouts and huge signing bonuses for unproven (and, often, future bust) draftees. The way the system is now, its almost better for a bad team to trade out of the top 10 picks to avoid the outrageous contracts for players that only have a slightly better chance of helping their team than players taken later in the first round.

  4. #4
    CanadianRam!'s Avatar
    CanadianRam! is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    461
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    i like the idea of a lottery like the nba
    but it probably wont happen anytime soon

  5. #5
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,654
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    While the idea of parity in the NFL is a good idea on paper, in reality it doesn't work out so well. Historically, those who are drafted highest do not seem to work out quite as well as those drafted later. Naturally, there are exceptions to this.
    This is why I believe the so-called parity idea should be changed. I believe that the teams who made the prior years' playoffs, including wildcard teams, (whether winning or losing in said playoffs) should be drafting in order of rank...i.e., Indy will probably be #32, Seattle #24, etc. Those teams who fared poorly in the season (Arizona, SF, Houston, and yes, the Rams), should use a lottery system to decide the order. Secondly, those teams who draft first obviously have greater needs to address than those who draft later, so the contracts should limit the pay of the draftee to a 'round maximum'...i.e., 1st round gets $300K max, 2nd $275K max, but the minimum pay should be no less than 80% of the next round maximum. This would lessen the chance of a pay holdout like happened with Atogwe. Players not signed by the start of their respective teams' training camp would be automatically signed at the round minimum. Another effect of this type of structure would be A) prevent overspending by teams who are close to the cap, and B) teams might be encouraged to address personnel needs more evenly instead of looking for one superstar. The biggest benefit would be more probable cap space for free agency aquisitions.
    Perhaps a parity-type situation would be of benefit in the search for coaches...I can see it now....
    "St. Louis agrees to trade Marmie to Houston for two over-the hill cheerleaders. The Rams will also give up one second round and one sixth round pick in next years' draft. Everyone agrees that St. Louis got one helluva deal here..."

  6. #6
    MOM's Avatar
    MOM
    MOM is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Age
    37
    Posts
    566
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    Lottery for all 32 teams. Here's a neat plot twist...

    How about anyone still unsigned at the beginning of training camp being automatically put into the free agent woodpile?

    I am the proud owner of a copy of EA Sports Front Office Football 2002. I have led many teams to Superbowls. Heck, I even got Houston into the playoffs.....twice! You run the front office. Anyhow, any rookies unsigned before training camp become automatic free agents. No holdouts there.

    Pay scale could be preset as well. Last rounders would be at the league minimum. Next round up would be a 10 percent increase, and the next round another 10 percent, and so on. I can't remember right off the top what the minimum is right now, but for math sake, say it is $300,000. Here is the scale:

    7th Round: $300,000
    6th Round: $330,000
    5th Round: $363,000
    4th Round: $399,300
    3rd Round: $439,230
    2nd Round: $483,153
    1st Round: $531,468

    The contracts would be for 3 years, with a 10 percent increase in the second and third years, then negotiations can go from there.

    Oh, and in the 3 years since I got the game, I have never been fired for poor performance.
    [SIGPIC]http://www.stickershoppe.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/MLRPANCmini.jpg[/SIGPIC]This is for Randy! GO BRM!

  7. #7
    sbramfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    los angeles
    Age
    42
    Posts
    894
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    wow, the season really is over....but OK, I'll bite:

    Probably best to have the bottom five teams do a lottery so that you don't have some team losing on purpose, but I think in the NFL, with only 16 games, you're usually never out of it until the season is halfway through, so I don't recall too many times in the past when a team appeared to be losing on purpose to get the #1 draft pick. I mean, Houston didn't exactly try to lose the game vs. the Rams. But probably by now they are looking to tank the last couple games to ensure they get Reggie Bush.

    The only thing I would like to change in the current system is how guys you drafted are handled. If you draft a guy, you should have more leverage to keep him. I have always liked the idea, similar to the long time veterans rule, where you pay them 1,000,000 but they are only charged 750,000 against the cap. it should just be a percentage, like 80% for any guy, when he is a FA or RFA. Just so that you don't have to bring up guys and just as they start getting good, another team overpays and steals them away.

    It would bring back just a touch of the old school system because you would have some incentive to build a team in the draft and keep those guys on your roster because whenever they come up for contract, you have a bit of an edge, unless someone wants to really overpay, they still could, so the player would still be able to shop himself around, just that the team that drafted him has a bit of an edge to matching any offer.

    And this would have the reverse effect on FA's, because anyone you didn't draft would still be like today and you would be limited to the extent that you could "buy" a good team.

    And if you did build a bit of a dynasty, through the draft, you could keep it going for a bit.
    Last edited by sbramfan; -12-09-2005 at 04:43 AM.

  8. #8
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,585
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    However, this same parity establishes a surreal race to see who can fall the farthest.
    I believe the guys over at Bang Cartoons have summed up my thoughts on this quite well (in their own warped way) with their latest cartoon.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  9. #9
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,585
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: HUb's thoughts on parity

    So here's an additional thought. We are currently picking 13th in the draft. Had we lost the Houston game, which we almost did, we would be picking 6th. Now what exactly does that mean? Assuming the 1st three picks were in some order Bush, Leinert, and Ferguson.....even if #4 and #5 both picked defense, we would, at #6, have the remainder of A.J. Hawk, Jimmy Williams, or Mario Williams, whichever didn't go to teams #4 and #5.

    Have I mentioned lately that I hate our current "award the loser" system?
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •