[Alberta's Child]

I hope there's someone from the NFL lurking here on FreeRepublic, because I'll tell you something . . . As exciting as last week's overtime games may have been, I have to say that the quality of play in the NFL has been downright abysmal for a few years now. Most of the teams that have played in the conference championship games in the last few years (especially in the NFC) wouldn't even have made the playoffs 15 years ago.

One of the most disturbing trends in the NFL over the last few years has been the tendency for these "incomplete" teams (i.e., missing a key ingredient -- like no passing game, or no run defense, bad special teams, etc.) to become the norm in championship games.

[rintense]

I will agree. After around the 4th week, I also felt that not one NFL team had anything special. It was just down right boring to watch. I'll add to your theory by stating that rules that are in a constant state of flux will never foster an exciting game.

[Warren_Piece]

The Pats are a complete team. They don't dominate in anything, but they are very good at everything. As a Titans fan, they have made me a believer.

[LS]

Until they do something about "parity," this will be the case. The fact is that a team that can afford a great defense has no money or picks for good receivers/runners/QB. A team with a Manning seldom has star defenders. You have to be phenomenally lucky in drafting to plug all your holes, say, on defense (like the Panthers did) then come up with a long-shot free agent like Delhomme in a key position.

Look, for example, at Dallas: it was possible that both Troy Hambrick and Quincy Carter MIGHT perform like all-pros. Hambrick had a 4.8 average before this season, and QC looked to improve. They already had a defense and a (supposedly) good line. That didn't happen. But say those two do come on, it's Dallas in the SB, not Carolina. That's no knock vs. Car., just an observation of your basic point on "parity."

The NFL really needs to find some equivalent of the NBA's "luxury tax" that will allow a team to keep players as long as it is willing to pay into a "kitty."

[jeremiah]

It is because of socialism in the NFL, in the form of a salary cap. This is supposedly good for fans, as they get a chance to watch their mediocre team get hot and go to a Super Bowl by winning games against slightly worse teams. I would rather have SF, Dallas, Pittsburgh or any other great team in it year after year, than see them unable to keep a team of stars together to form a dynasty. I absolutely loved the NFL since I can remember, but in the last few years, it is hard to watch. Too many rule changes, protected QBs, no bump and run, domed stadiums etc......NFL really does stand for the No Fun League.