BuzzerBeater Forums

Lol I disagree completely. Lets take another look at those division winners.

Patriots, no surprise.

Ravens: Been battling with the Steelers for almost a decade now. Had an up and down year, and really went into the playoffs as an underdog. Not necessarily a surprise, but definitely not a given.

Texans: Pretty much prove my point. A team outside the traditional powers that spent much of the season as the top seed in the AFC, and had a good a chance as anyone in the playoffs.

Packers: Not a surprise, but the Bears spent much of the season ahead of them

Falcons: The only reason this isn't a surprise is because the Saints had internal issues.

49ers: yeah not much of a surprise.

You also left off the Broncos and the Redskins as division winners.

No one would have been surprised to see the Pats, Ravens, Texans, Packers, Falcons, 49ers, or Broncos in the Super Bowl. Thats 7 teams right there. Not counting the Colts or Seahawks, who got real close to being in the hunt.

As far as baseball, I wont get into specifics, but you're so far off its not even funny. Haven't had a repeat World Series Winner since the 2000 Yankees. In that 13 year span, 10 different teams have won titles, and 15 different teams have been to the World Series.

The Texans, prove your point? Many prognosticators had them in the Superbowl. Who was going to win the division, the Jags, the Titans, surely no one had the Colts winning the division. The Texans, very much prove my point.

And Baseball, you have to got to be kidding me, for the last decade, it was the Yankees, and whoever else wanted to spend like them. So yeah, I'm not that far off, plus its baseball, who cares.

We are gonna have to agree to disagree :) The Yankees won three titles in a row with mostly homegrown talent from 1998-2000. Since then they have gone on the big spending spree that everyone associates with the Yankees. Since then, they have exactly one title. Fewer than the Cardinals (not known for spending), the Red Sox (before they started spending), and the Giants (definitely not known as spenders).

Your not saying, who actually wins the title, you said how many teams could be considered, to win a championship. Yes you would have to include the Yanks, even though they only won 1 in a while.

Thats true. But they are one of quite a few. This season for instance. I could make a case for 10 teams as possible legitimate World Series candidates

I think we need to just realize a couple of things here and get back to being a big happy group of friends:

1. I already won the thread with the Darko write-in vote. ;)
2. If you want to see a sport where anyone, truly, anyone can win, just watch the NHL. Offer obviously void in Canada, however, but the defending champions came into the playoffs as the 8th seed out of 8 in the West and stomped mudholes until there was no dirt left to be found.
3. Baseball and Football also suffer from only having four legitimate title contenders, as long as you're allowed to wait until the conference championships / league division series to identify those contenders. That way WFU can be correct without having to reconcile his statement with arbitrary things like the actual champions.

Well out of the 4 major sports, football is the only 1 that doesn't have a best of series to determine the Champions. If they had that, it might be easier to eliminate some teams. There 1 play in the 1st or 2nd round can eliminate you from a championship. Thats not the case, in the other sports. I agree with you, on hockey though.

I'd also like to throw out, what does, how many teams can predict to make the finals, or win the championship, have to do with Kobe, LeBron, or Darko is better?

Kobe in his prime would destroy anyone, and even give MJ a run when MJ was in his prime.
81 on the Raptors to bring them back and win,
And outscoring the Mavericks in 3 quarters with 62.

Also, in that Raptors game, he really only shot 46 times, 28-46(61%) and 7-13(54%) from downtown, not to mention the 18-20(90%) at the Free Throw line, he even managed 2 assists, which doesn't seem like much, but when you score 81! He also had 3 steals and a block.

In that Mavericks game, Kobe went 18-31(58%) 4-10(40%) from 3 22-25 Free Throws(88%) 8 Rebounds, and 3 Steals in 33 Minutes..

Not to mention, he scored 50 points in four consecutive games...

Now you ask, how is this relevant?

Did Lebron do any of that?

If Lebron had 40+ shots against the Raptors (that Raptor team, current Raptor team, or almost any Raptor team) he would score a good bundle of points for sure. But what's the point? A win is a win.

Exactly, if a win is a win why are we comparing these two?

5 Rings to 1 Ring. 6 Rings to 5 Rings.

MJ > Kobe > Lebron.