Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I think we're talking about different things. I'm not talking about pure equality through socialism. The NFL is egalitarian in that every team has the same rights and opportunities. It is completely artificial and designed. Those who succeed over time are doing it based on skill and insight. I think everyone on this board believes this is how it should be. The Patriots deserve to reap the benefits of their sustained success. The Jets deserve to wallow in mediocrity. However, no team deserves to have no shot ever. And they've designed the League to make sure that if you're on the bottom for too long, it's because of your incompetence, not your opportunity.
Are you arguing that the NFL should look more like the MLB?
TM
|
No, I was trying to suggest that there is a widespread appetite for competitions with winners and losers. The NFL should change its rules to make the game more entertaining for its fans, preferably with fewer head injuries. Our society should change its rules to provide for more equality of opportunity and, if not socialism or equality of result, a better safety net to make sure that the worse off are not too badly off. The NFL, in its infinite wisdom, divides television revenue relatively evenly, so that the Patriots don't get that much more for winning than the Jets do for being the Jets. As with society, there is quite a lot of contingency in how this works -- the NFL is more able to do this than MLB because the national broadcast rights are so valuable and trump local broadcasts. The MLB continues with huge income disparities between teams that are a function of local TV markets, not success on the field. That kind of inequality has a disturbing way of perpetuating itself.
