Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

How does a team prove that it is the best in the league?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
iPwn


Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 45026
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SuperBowl=best wrote:
Quote:
Either it translates elsewhere or it doesn't. You get that, right?
No, you are dead wrong. It can translate in other situations, and maybe not in others. If you don't get that, then your level of comprehension is not up to par.
And I later said that you have to be able to explain why it doesn't, if it doesn't.

Quote:
Quote:
And for a theory to hold water, you have to be able to apply it to other situations that would be the same. Otherwise you cannot claim it to be definitive. Either this rule need apply to other situations, or you need be able to explain why it doesn't. Otherwise, why should anyone believe you? Reproducibility is a fundamental piece of any quality claim. I'm asking you for the reproducibility. It's not tangential or off topic or whatever you claim. You're making a claim with very large implications. I'm simply asking you to repeat the results before I trust the claim. Is that so much to ask? You have to be able to produce evidence of reproducibility to a skeptic before your claim need be taken seriously. And you haven't done that.
Ok, I am willing to discuss this until we are on the same page.

Idk what else needs to be said. The topic has been discussed for 60 pages now. And there is no need to bring other sports into this. If a SB champ proves he is the best by winning the SB, that doesn't mean that a boxer proves he is the best of that entire year by winning 1 fight. It doesn't mean a wrestler is best of the entire year by winning 1 tournament. Unless that tournament was as all-defining as the NFL season is.

If you're skeptical that the SB champ has proven it is the best, then go back and reread all the arguments in favor of that statement. They are compelling arguments that you can't argue against.
Except I have argued against them, and instead of answering my questions with a straight answer, you've skirted the questions, not answered them, and tried labeling me a troll.

So I'll ask you the same question I asked Shockey (well, a new version of the same question). If you and I are both trying out for the Olympics, and we go to a race, and we're told that no one who has ever lost this race has ever gotten an invite to the Olympics, would you treat it like a must win race? If you were going to treat it differently, why?
_________________

- Best since day one -
The road to success is always under construction - Gus Bradley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SuperBowl=best


Joined: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 358
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

texans_uk wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
Tom Shean wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
x0x wrote:
Tom Shean wrote:
We can look at English soccer for another example.

For the best teams, they are involved in 4 competitions in one season, the Premier League, the FA Cup, the League Cup, and the Champions' League.

The Premier League is a round robin type league, while the rest use single or double elimination formats.

No team has ever won all four in the same year.

Coincidence?


Considering the structure and importance of one of those Championships to certain clubs, isn't a Treble essentially considered the top of the heap?

83-84 Liverpool or 06-07 Chelsea come to mind. Undoubtedly the best clubs that season.
I rate the CL above all else, but fans will make excuses using the "we prioritised other competitions" excuse.

So who do you think was the best team in the Premier League last year?

Manchester City, who won the round robin format Premier League, or Chelsea, who won the Champions' League tournament that is the ultimate goal for them?
Hehehe. Are you ready to argue?

Chelsea Football Club. We can continue this in the appropriate thread if you want


No they weren't, you're an idiot.
The CL is the bigger prize. City failed to achieve that, and Mancini is a [inappropriate/removed] manager. Idiot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SuperBowl=best


Joined: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 358
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
And I later said that you have to be able to explain why it doesn't, if it doesn't.
I already did several times. What part of "different sports and competitions have different parameters" do you not understand?
Quote:
Except I have argued against them, and instead of answering my questions with a straight answer, you've skirted the questions, not answered them, and tried labeling me a troll.

So I'll ask you the same question I asked Shockey (well, a new version of the same question). If you and I are both trying out for the Olympics, and we go to a race, and we're told that no one who has ever lost this race has ever gotten an invite to the Olympics, would you treat it like a must win race? If you were going to treat it differently, why?
Your questions have nothing to do with the topic. We are not talking about the Olympics, or a hypothetical situation.

The Bama-LSU game has nothing to do with the topic. Maybe they did try 100% percent. Maybe a couple of Bama players gave less effort during a play or 2. We do not know, we cannot read their minds.

Nothing that happened in that game, or in any BCS game ever, changes the fact that the NFL playoffs decide the better of the playoff teams. I know what you've been trying to do. You're trying to set up a hypothetical. Asking what if playoff losers got a 2nd chance. They don't get a 2nd chance, so the point is moot.

In this hypothetical world you're trying to create, maybe all playoff losers win every single playoff rematch 100-0. Maybe they all lose them 100-0. It doesn't matter, arguing hypotheticals is one of the most pointless things you can do, and have no place in a rational argument.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
texans_uk


Joined: 26 Feb 2009
Posts: 28849
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SuperBowl=best wrote:
texans_uk wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
Tom Shean wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
x0x wrote:
Tom Shean wrote:
We can look at English soccer for another example.

For the best teams, they are involved in 4 competitions in one season, the Premier League, the FA Cup, the League Cup, and the Champions' League.

The Premier League is a round robin type league, while the rest use single or double elimination formats.

No team has ever won all four in the same year.

Coincidence?


Considering the structure and importance of one of those Championships to certain clubs, isn't a Treble essentially considered the top of the heap?

83-84 Liverpool or 06-07 Chelsea come to mind. Undoubtedly the best clubs that season.
I rate the CL above all else, but fans will make excuses using the "we prioritised other competitions" excuse.

So who do you think was the best team in the Premier League last year?

Manchester City, who won the round robin format Premier League, or Chelsea, who won the Champions' League tournament that is the ultimate goal for them?
Hehehe. Are you ready to argue?

Chelsea Football Club. We can continue this in the appropriate thread if you want


No they weren't, you're an idiot.
The CL is the bigger prize. City failed to achieve that, and Mancini is a [inappropriate/removed] manager. Idiot.


What had mancini got to do with anything?

Chelsea were the luckiest team to ever win a trophy, they were outplayed in 90% of their games, messi who scored 100 totals last year missed a penalty against them, they finished a lowly 5th in the league.

I advise you not to try and have this argument.
_________________
DallasInHeart wrote:
Buddy if you lived in Europe or ever gone to visit Europe you would know that over there Football is totally on a different level

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom Shean


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 4740
Location: Tha 703
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

texans_uk wrote:
What had mancini got to do with anything?

Chelsea were the luckiest team to ever win a trophy, they were outplayed in 90% of their games, messi who scored 100 totals last year missed a penalty against them, they finished a lowly 5th in the league.

I advise you not to try and have this argument.

6th actually.

And to build off of that, why did Chelsea finish that low in the table? Where they not taking the Premier League seriously?

If they were the best team in the league last year, surely they would have finished at least top 4, to secure Champions' League qualification the next year. Because in order to prioritize it, they would have to qualify for it first.

Why then, did they drop important late season games to Newcastle an Liverpool that essentially rule them out of finishing top 4?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 45026
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SuperBowl=best wrote:
iPwn wrote:
And I later said that you have to be able to explain why it doesn't, if it doesn't.
I already did several times. What part of "different sports and competitions have different parameters" do you not understand?
Quote:
Except I have argued against them, and instead of answering my questions with a straight answer, you've skirted the questions, not answered them, and tried labeling me a troll.

So I'll ask you the same question I asked Shockey (well, a new version of the same question). If you and I are both trying out for the Olympics, and we go to a race, and we're told that no one who has ever lost this race has ever gotten an invite to the Olympics, would you treat it like a must win race? If you were going to treat it differently, why?
Your questions have nothing to do with the topic. We are not talking about the Olympics, or a hypothetical situation.

The Bama-LSU game has nothing to do with the topic. Maybe they did try 100% percent. Maybe a couple of Bama players gave less effort during a play or 2. We do not know, we cannot read their minds.

Nothing that happened in that game, or in any BCS game ever, changes the fact that the NFL playoffs decide the better of the playoff teams. I know what you've been trying to do. You're trying to set up a hypothetical. Asking what if playoff losers got a 2nd chance. They don't get a 2nd chance, so the point is moot.

In this hypothetical world you're trying to create, maybe all playoff losers win every single playoff rematch 100-0. Maybe they all lose them 100-0. It doesn't matter, arguing hypotheticals is one of the most pointless things you can do, and have no place in a rational argument.
We just went over why they are relevant, you agreed to discuss them until we're on the same page, and now you're back to saying they have nothing to do with the topic.
_________________

- Best since day one -
The road to success is always under construction - Gus Bradley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GaTechRavens


Moderator
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 17491
Location: Madison, WI
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SuperBowl=best wrote:
In this hypothetical world you're trying to create, maybe all playoff losers win every single playoff rematch 100-0. Maybe they all lose them 100-0. It doesn't matter, arguing hypotheticals is one of the most pointless things you can do, and have no place in a rational argument.
Blindly holding things at face value is the single worst thing you can do in a rational argument. Context absolutely has to be taken into consideration.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SuperBowl=best


Joined: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 358
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

texans_uk wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
texans_uk wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
Tom Shean wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
x0x wrote:
Tom Shean wrote:
We can look at English soccer for another example.

For the best teams, they are involved in 4 competitions in one season, the Premier League, the FA Cup, the League Cup, and the Champions' League.

The Premier League is a round robin type league, while the rest use single or double elimination formats.

No team has ever won all four in the same year.

Coincidence?


Considering the structure and importance of one of those Championships to certain clubs, isn't a Treble essentially considered the top of the heap?

83-84 Liverpool or 06-07 Chelsea come to mind. Undoubtedly the best clubs that season.
I rate the CL above all else, but fans will make excuses using the "we prioritised other competitions" excuse.

So who do you think was the best team in the Premier League last year?

Manchester City, who won the round robin format Premier League, or Chelsea, who won the Champions' League tournament that is the ultimate goal for them?
Hehehe. Are you ready to argue?

Chelsea Football Club. We can continue this in the appropriate thread if you want


No they weren't, you're an idiot.
The CL is the bigger prize. City failed to achieve that, and Mancini is a [inappropriate/removed] manager. Idiot.


What had mancini got to do with anything?

Chelsea were the luckiest team to ever win a trophy, they were outplayed in 90% of their games, messi who scored 100 totals last year missed a penalty against them, they finished a lowly 5th in the league.

I advise you not to try and have this argument.
Chelsea did what they had to do to win. If the opposing team has a better possession game, then you bunker, otherwise, you'll get zapped. Messi missed that penalty on the biggest stage for them that season. He has no excuse.

You can't hold their league result against CFC, because they were properly chasing the CL. And they ended up qualifying for the next CL anyway, so their 5th place ended up not mattering.

Mancini is a part of that team, and his poor decisions led to City's miserable group stage crashout. It was embarassing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SuperBowl=best


Joined: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 358
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
iPwn wrote:
And I later said that you have to be able to explain why it doesn't, if it doesn't.
I already did several times. What part of "different sports and competitions have different parameters" do you not understand?
Quote:
Except I have argued against them, and instead of answering my questions with a straight answer, you've skirted the questions, not answered them, and tried labeling me a troll.

So I'll ask you the same question I asked Shockey (well, a new version of the same question). If you and I are both trying out for the Olympics, and we go to a race, and we're told that no one who has ever lost this race has ever gotten an invite to the Olympics, would you treat it like a must win race? If you were going to treat it differently, why?
Your questions have nothing to do with the topic. We are not talking about the Olympics, or a hypothetical situation.

The Bama-LSU game has nothing to do with the topic. Maybe they did try 100% percent. Maybe a couple of Bama players gave less effort during a play or 2. We do not know, we cannot read their minds.

Nothing that happened in that game, or in any BCS game ever, changes the fact that the NFL playoffs decide the better of the playoff teams. I know what you've been trying to do. You're trying to set up a hypothetical. Asking what if playoff losers got a 2nd chance. They don't get a 2nd chance, so the point is moot.

In this hypothetical world you're trying to create, maybe all playoff losers win every single playoff rematch 100-0. Maybe they all lose them 100-0. It doesn't matter, arguing hypotheticals is one of the most pointless things you can do, and have no place in a rational argument.
We just went over why they are relevant, you agreed to discuss them until we're on the same page, and now you're back to saying they have nothing to do with the topic.
I agreed to discuss this thread topic until we are on the same page. By now we should be. If not, there are 60 pages for ya.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 45026
Location: Warbortles Nation
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SuperBowl=best wrote:
iPwn wrote:
SuperBowl=best wrote:
iPwn wrote:
And I later said that you have to be able to explain why it doesn't, if it doesn't.
I already did several times. What part of "different sports and competitions have different parameters" do you not understand?
Quote:
Except I have argued against them, and instead of answering my questions with a straight answer, you've skirted the questions, not answered them, and tried labeling me a troll.

So I'll ask you the same question I asked Shockey (well, a new version of the same question). If you and I are both trying out for the Olympics, and we go to a race, and we're told that no one who has ever lost this race has ever gotten an invite to the Olympics, would you treat it like a must win race? If you were going to treat it differently, why?
Your questions have nothing to do with the topic. We are not talking about the Olympics, or a hypothetical situation.

The Bama-LSU game has nothing to do with the topic. Maybe they did try 100% percent. Maybe a couple of Bama players gave less effort during a play or 2. We do not know, we cannot read their minds.

Nothing that happened in that game, or in any BCS game ever, changes the fact that the NFL playoffs decide the better of the playoff teams. I know what you've been trying to do. You're trying to set up a hypothetical. Asking what if playoff losers got a 2nd chance. They don't get a 2nd chance, so the point is moot.

In this hypothetical world you're trying to create, maybe all playoff losers win every single playoff rematch 100-0. Maybe they all lose them 100-0. It doesn't matter, arguing hypotheticals is one of the most pointless things you can do, and have no place in a rational argument.
We just went over why they are relevant, you agreed to discuss them until we're on the same page, and now you're back to saying they have nothing to do with the topic.
I agreed to discuss this thread topic until we are on the same page. By now we should be. If not, there are 60 pages for ya.
And the last 25 or so of you dodging questions. If you're not going to answer the questions, I'm just going to assume you don't have an answer and call it a day. It's still possible for a team to not win the Super Bowl and be the best.
_________________

- Best since day one -
The road to success is always under construction - Gus Bradley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J Pep 4 Step


Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 29432
Location: Greenvillain, NC
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is winning a championship the only wasy a team can "excell all others?"
_________________

CK on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom Shean


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 4740
Location: Tha 703
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SuperBowl=best wrote:
You can't hold their league result against CFC, because they were properly chasing the CL. And they ended up qualifying for the next CL anyway, so their 5th place ended up not mattering.

Over the years, the only teams I can remember to win the UCL and not finish in a qualifying spot are 2012 Chelsea and 2005 Liverpool.

All the other winners were able to successfully win the Champions' League and finish in a qualifying spot.

Why does Chelsea get a free pass?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shockey1979


Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 20281
Location: RI/MA
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J Pep 4 Step wrote:
Is winning a championship the only wasy a team can "excell all others?"


Yes

I don't see how any other team can excel all others without earning the highest team achievement for that season.
_________________

"Sundown, you better take care... if I find you been creepin' round my back stairs"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 11225
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

First of all Chelsea were not outplayed in 90% of their games. The only games they were outplayed in were the Semi-Final and the Final. Lets be real, those two teams that they faced were 2 of the best in the world. First of all against Barcelona it was part of Chelsea's plan to sit back. Youre not going to outplay Barcelona. We played Bayern Munich in their home stadium, they were basically the home team and they were expected to have more of the chances. Very rarely does the best team that year win the Championship, so if the team wins it says theyre the best you cant really argue against them. BTW that Barca game was payback for what happened couple years ago when Iniesta scored that goal.

BTW, how has this thread lasted this long?
_________________


"Champagne"..."Mountain Range"..."Hugs".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J Pep 4 Step


Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 29432
Location: Greenvillain, NC
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shockey1979 wrote:
J Pep 4 Step wrote:
Is winning a championship the only wasy a team can "excell all others?"


Yes

I don't see how any other team can excel all others without earning the highest team achievement for that season.


So you cant excel all others in any other way from season to season? You cant excel all others in the run game? Or in the passing game? Or in scoring differentials? Total offense? Total defense?
_________________

CK on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68  Next
Page 64 of 68

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group