Kid-Wicked wrote:
that would be fantastic. play it on a cfl field with cfl rules. bring it.
but that still doesn't make the super bowl champs "world champions". they win the vince lombardy trophy.
neither are the NBA champs. they win the larry o'brien NBA championship
Wrong again. The Superbowl champions are WORLD CHAMPIONS because the NFL is by far and away the premiere football league in the world. There is no other team in the world that can compete with the elite of the NFL, or even teams like the Rams and Chiefs who only had a few wins combined. If there is ever a league internationally that rivals the quality of the NFL, then they'll stop calling the SB champions WORLD CHAMPIONS. Until then, the name stays.
you just keep on living in your own little delusional world. you can call them the poison champions if you want.
you're so fucking stupid it hurts.
Kid-Wicked wrote:
that would be fantastic. play it on a cfl field with cfl rules. bring it.
but that still doesn't make the super bowl champs "world champions". they win the vince lombardy trophy.
neither are the NBA champs. they win the larry o'brien NBA championship
Wrong again. The Superbowl champions are WORLD CHAMPIONS because the NFL is by far and away the premiere football league in the world. There is no other team in the world that can compete with the elite of the NFL, or even teams like the Rams and Chiefs who only had a few wins combined. If there is ever a league internationally that rivals the quality of the NFL, then they'll stop calling the SB champions WORLD CHAMPIONS. Until then, the name stays.
you just keep on living in your own little delusional world. you can call them the poison champions if you want.
you're so fucking stupid it hurts.
I'm not in my own little world. I didn't coin the term "world champions." Every Superbowl winning team in the history of the NFL have been called "world champions." Deal with it.
DISCLAIMER: The below images were forced upon me against my will by the moderator and are NOT of my choosing.
poizond13 wrote:When you refer to the Indianapolis Colts, you refer to them as WORLD CHAMPIONS!!!!
GO BLUE!
ur a Chicagoan
He lives in a suburb. Equivalent of people from New Jersey calling themselves New Yorkers.
I lived in New Jersey for 23 years and never once heard somebody call themselves a NY'er. We sort of have mutual disdain for one another unless it's sports-related. And even in that case it's more that Jersey's butthurt (rightfully so) that they don't credit for the Jets and Giants.
JakeYonkel wrote:
I lived in New Jersey for 23 years and never once heard somebody call themselves a NY'er. We sort of have mutual disdain for one another unless it's sports-related. And even in that case it's more that Jersey's butthurt (rightfully so) that they don't credit for the Jets and Giants.
I never said anyone from NJ did. I said it's the equivalent.
poizond13 wrote:I'm not in my own little world. I didn't coin the term "world champions." Every Superbowl winning team in the history of the NFL have been called "world champions." Deal with it.
you're by yourself on this one. the league hasn't even called it a world championship since super bowl II.
poizond13 wrote:I'm not in my own little world. I didn't coin the term "world champions." Every Superbowl winning team in the history of the NFL have been called "world champions." Deal with it.
you're by yourself on this one. the league hasn't even called it a world championship since super bowl II.
poizond13 wrote:I'm not in my own little world. I didn't coin the term "world champions." Every Superbowl winning team in the history of the NFL have been called "world champions." Deal with it.
you're by yourself on this one. the league hasn't even called it a world championship since super bowl II.
how did the colts do against italy this year?
as much as i despise p13, he's right about this.
imagine that.
got some proof? even if some jackass tv reporter calls them world champs doesn't mean they are. they're the superbowl champs of american football.
Kid-Wicked wrote:
that would be fantastic. play it on a cfl field with cfl rules. bring it.
but that still doesn't make the super bowl champs "world champions". they win the vince lombardy trophy.
neither are the NBA champs. they win the larry o'brien NBA championship
Wrong again. The Superbowl champions are WORLD CHAMPIONS because the NFL is by far and away the premiere football league in the world. There is no other team in the world that can compete with the elite of the NFL, or even teams like the Rams and Chiefs who only had a few wins combined. If there is ever a league internationally that rivals the quality of the NFL, then they'll stop calling the SB champions WORLD CHAMPIONS. Until then, the name stays.
you just keep on living in your own little delusional world. you can call them the poison champions if you want.
you're so fucking stupid it hurts.
Sorry dude, but he is right about this. No way in hell the CFL champs could beat the NFL champs, whoever it may be. The CFL champs or a CFL all-star team couldnt even beat the lowliest of NFL teams.
poizond13 wrote:
Wrong again. The Superbowl champions are WORLD CHAMPIONS because the NFL is by far and away the premiere football league in the world. There is no other team in the world that can compete with the elite of the NFL, or even teams like the Rams and Chiefs who only had a few wins combined. If there is ever a league internationally that rivals the quality of the NFL, then they'll stop calling the SB champions WORLD CHAMPIONS. Until then, the name stays.
you just keep on living in your own little delusional world. you can call them the poison champions if you want.
you're so fucking stupid it hurts.
Sorry dude, but he is right about this. No way in hell the CFL champs could beat the NFL champs, whoever it may be. The CFL champs or a CFL all-star team couldnt even beat the lowliest of NFL teams.
On an NFL field with NFL rules, not a chance. The NFL team would destroy the CFL team by a wide margin every single time.
On a CFL field with CFL rules, the Grey Cup champ could most certainly beat the Super Bowl champ, more often than not.
I admit I know little about CFL rules. About the only thing I do know is the field is ten yards longer and maybe wider too? I thought everything else is pretty much the same. Just seems to me there is too much of a talent gap between the NFL and CFL for the CFL to have a chance, even if playing by their own rules.
The Dolly Llama wrote:I admit I know little about CFL rules. About the only thing I do know is the field is ten yards longer and maybe wider too? I thought everything else is pretty much the same. Just seems to me there is too much of a talent gap between the NFL and CFL for the CFL to have a chance, even if playing by their own rules.
There isn't that much of a talent gap.
The main difference is player size which is dictated by the contrasting styles of each league.
The NFL plays on a smaller field and is geared to a more north and south game and, as such, the players are generally more geared toward it. Size is the premium in the NFL. There are some superb athletes in the NFL, but they are athletes of a certain ilk - giants, respective to their positions. That works great in a north-south style of game.
The CFL is geared more toward an east-west style of play, putting a premium on quickness and elusiveness.
The NFL game relies more on holding at the point of attack, which enables out of shape slobs to have jobs to the point where being fat isn't always a bad thing, whereas everyone in the CFL has to be in good shape because there's more field to cover.
Exceptions of course, but the NFL is a collection of specialists. There are tremendous athletes, to be sure, but they are specialists nonetheless, where the CFL players, by and large, are multi talented.
If you follow hockey, think back to the days when the Boston Garden was around.
The Bruins were pretty good on the small surface because it negated the free wheeling types for the most part. However, being built for a north-south bruising style of play, they were ill equipped to handle the free wheeling teams on the bigger ice surface.
Of course they won some games on the bigger ice surface.
Another example, this time in the football world, would be Ohio State's recent performances against teams from the south.
Ohio State is a team built for north-south smash mouth football, played in a climate where it rains, snows, gets sloppy/muddy.
However, when they ran into the southern finesse teams like Florida and LSU in ideal conditions, they were ill equipped to handle the wide open style of play. Yet, Ohio State produces way more NFL ready players than Florida does because they are better suited to the north-south style of the NFL.
It's not bulletproof, but it's also not much of a stretch to say that, based on OSU alone, that when the north-south style bruisers meet the smaller, more elusive type teams in conditions that are conducive to a wide open style of game, thus a Grey Cup champ would win most of the time versus a SB champ on a CFL field using CFL rules.
Not to mention, even in horrifically cold wintery conditions, CFL teams still wing the ball around on account of the rules, whereas the NFL teams lean toward running the ball when the conditions are less than ideal.
A team like the Colts or the Saints would have the best chance for success playing on a CFL field with CFL rules, particularly the Colts since the play a style most similar to the CFL game.
ah, more american bullshit. a league with 30 some odd teams all based in the same country is no world champion. another reason for the rest of the world to hate them i guess.lol
i think a cfl team playing a nfl team with cfl rules would favor the canadian team. i think they would win.
as far as say, montreal vs detriot with nfl rules........the nfl would definitely have the upper hand but i think the score might be a lot closer than you think. don't forget, most of the players in the cfl played most of their careers with american rules.
Kid-Wicked wrote:ah, more american bullshit. a league with 30 some odd teams all based in the same country is no world champion. another reason for the rest of the world to hate them i guess.lol
i think a cfl team playing a nfl team with cfl rules would favor the canadian team. i think they would win.
as far as say, montreal vs detriot with nfl rules........the nfl would definitely have the upper hand but i think the score might be a lot closer than you think. don't forget, most of the players in the cfl played most of their careers with american rules.
There's a reason the guys in Montreal aren't playing in the north-south league, and it's because they aren't built for that style of game, and their playing style doesn't fit the the smaller NFL.
I'll admit to not knowing the first thing about CFL ball, but I'd pose a question. If the CFL is on par with the NFL, why do the best college players always go to the NFL? I'd assume that there's a lot more money in the NFL, and thus the attraction, but if the best players are in the NFL, how can the CFL be expected to compete with them?
bane wrote:I'll admit to not knowing the first thing about CFL ball, but I'd pose a question. If the CFL is on par with the NFL, why do the best college players always go to the NFL? I'd assume that there's a lot more money in the NFL, and thus the attraction, but if the best players are in the NFL, how can the CFL be expected to compete with them?
The best players don't go to the NFL. The best of certain specific models of players go to the NFL.
The money is always the deciding factor, but the money ruins everything. Make no mistake, there are lots of guys playing in the NFL who don't deserve to be there. And you know why they're there ? Money. The NFL, with roster size limits, an out of control player's union and a salary cap, generally tries to avoid giving millions of dollars to players considered "small" on account of them being a greater injury risk. So, there are lots of players employed in the NFL not because they're the best, but because they pose less of an injury risk.
There will always be exceptions, like a Steve Smith, but guys like him have to prove themselves durable and effective for a period of time before they get their payoff (which is the way it really should be for every player coming out of college, but that's a topic for another day).
However, Steve Smith is a great example. He was freakishly talented coming out of college. However, he's 5'9. "Too short" to play in the NFL. Carolina took a chance on him with a low risk draft choice.
Then, they made him cut his teeth on return duty.
Then he became an elite WR. hell, he even suffered a serious injury. Steve Smith is the living embodiment of the NFL's philosophy.
Now, for every Steve Smith, there are hundreds of guys who are talented, but don't even get a shot because they don't meet the right criteria. There are very few GMs willing to take a risk giving an "undersized' player a contract.
Think about it - Drew Brees is 6 feet tall and is considered undersized by the NFL's standard. LOL
So yes, there are lots of freakishly talented football players not in the NFL.
Lots are more talented physically, and just not cut out for the NFL version of North American football. Just as many are more talented at the American version of football as well, but when the genetic jackpot was being held, they weren't holding the winning ticket with the grand prize of pre requisite size.
Also, there are plenty of freakishly athletically gifted players who just don't fit in with such a stationary, straight ahead and regimented style of play; they are more instinctual and sandlottish.
Again, it's not bulletproof, but look at NCAA ball. Teams like OSU churn out NFL ready players, but they haven't fared very well against the more wide open, free wheeling teams predicated on speed and operating in space when playing in conditions that didn't require north-south football.
There are plenty of Chrebets and Emmitt Smith types in the NFL. Jones/Drew is what 5'8"? Size is always important, and depending on the position, it can keep a guy out of the league, but there are too many success stories from smaller guys to completely discount talent in favor of size. I'm gonna have to start watching some CFL ball though. If it's that wide open, it sounds like it would be pretty entertaining.
bane wrote:There are plenty of Chrebets and Emmitt Smith types in the NFL. Jones/Drew is what 5'8"? Size is always important, and depending on the position, it can keep a guy out of the league, but there are too many success stories from smaller guys to completely discount talent in favor of size. I'm gonna have to start watching some CFL ball though. If it's that wide open, it sounds like it would be pretty entertaining.
"Plenty?"
Check yourself.
There aren't plenty at all. There are very few.
Seems to me Jones Drew had to share the load to see if he could hold up before he got an extension.
Seems to me Emmitt Smith was passed over by a lot of teams because of his size and, even after producing, his employer STILL didn't want to pay him.
Seems to me Chrebet got to walk on for walk on salary while Key was hauling in #1 money.
Are you familiar with the term "3rd down back" ? Are you familiar with its connotation ?
Of course I am. Are you being purposefully obtuse? For a guy that has beaten P13 over the head for being 160 LBs soaking wet you sure do seem to be the little guy defender all of a sudden. Yes, bigger guys tend to do better in the NFL. That's not exactly a news flash Juggs. That's football.
bane wrote:Of course I am. Are you being purposefully obtuse? For a guy that has beaten P13 over the head for being 160 LBs soaking wet you sure do seem to be the little guy defender all of a sudden. Yes, bigger guys tend to do better in the NFL. That's not exactly a news flash Juggs. That's football.
DISCLAIMER: The below images were forced upon me against my will by the moderator and are NOT of my choosing.
