Thread: Mortal Lock!!
View Single Post
  #13  
Old 08-14-2007, 12:35 AM
blackasthma blackasthma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 187
Default Re: Mortal Lock!!

[ QUOTE ]
I can assure you that the Vikings, sans 1998, have ALWAYS played to the level of their competition. There is no need to analyze their schedule. This team absolutely sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an argument supporting.....the UNDER @ 7 ???

If the Vikings play to the level of their competition, doesn't that seemingly imply they should win 8 games and the correct play would be OVER 7? I would've never touched the UNDER with a ten-yard pole, and I'd be even less inclined to do so if there's a shred of truth to your argument.

I believe highly subjective statements like yours are common among fans of most teams in the NFL (and the NBA as well). Similar in effect to one declaring that his hometown is "one of the fastest growing communities in the country," only because he is proud to live there. I think the truth is that most NFL teams, on average, intrinsically do play to the level of their competition. Dynasties and perennial losers aside, not much talent separates the bulk of NFL teams from each other. Contrast this to college football. I NEVER hear anyone accuse a college team of sucking because they "play to the level of their competition." Why? Because there can be drastic differences in the athletic talent base on teams, even those within the same conference (e.g., Oklahoma & Baylor in Big 12).

I actually do think there is some truth to your theory about the Vikings. Your conclusion, however, makes no sense. Last year, the Lions nearly won in New England. Did the Lions play to the level of the Patriots, or vice versa? The Lions' season point differential in 2006 was actually better than that of the Niners, yet the Lions lost 4 more games than San Fran. With few exceptions, the level of competition among all pro sports teams lies within a very tight range. In any given year, some of these teams are "lucky" to win more than their fair share while others are "unlucky" to lose more than their fair share. But that shouldn't imply that they "suck" or that they are even "good." If anything, it means they just haven't yet managed to truly distance themselves from the rest of the pack...
Reply With Quote