When they say “parity” now, they mean that the strict, well-enforced salary cap has made all of the teams pretty much equal. Well, at least given them the means to be equal. Obviously, some front offices put together better teams than other front offices. And small market teams have just as much of a chance to get the big names as the big market teams (contrast to MLB where the Yanks have remained dominant for a decade, due largely to the ability to completely outspend everyone else).
Teams, nowadays, are simply forced to accept weaknesses in certain facets of the game because of the restrictions. No team can have a great QB, great backs, great receivers, and a great O-line like the early-90s Dallas teams, for instance. They simply can’t afford it. Or if they do have that, they have ZERO left over for defense.
One aspect where I think it shows up in is a lack of depth at certain positions. Forget having Joe Montana with Young as a back up. You wouldn’t even have Jim Kelley with Frank Reich as a backup in today’s NFL. Or even Phil Simms with Jeff Hostetler. What this means is that teams with a slight edge can go in the tank real fast if they suffer a key injury.
So, what happens is that teams come out of nowhere to be good very quickly and teams go from good to nowhere very quickly, and this can kill MNF when they’re trying to put together late season matchups.
I love football. I love Monday Night Football. (I was the one who started a thread once asking if other people tried to catch the opening skit every game before the main opening theme.) That said, the games start too late in the Eastern zone. Watching the game back home in the Mountain zone is great because the game starts at 7 and is generally over by 10 or 10:30, so I can then either go to bed without being up really late or watch the Late Show. While I can see why starting the game at 7 Eastern would be too early, they should’ve stuck with the 8 PM starting time. True, that makes it harder for the people in the Pacific zone, but that’s their own fault.
However, I agree that the parity (which makes the NFL great, in my opinion) makes it difficult to come up with good games for every Monday night. Part of the problem could be taken care of if every game was between division rivals, but then again that could backfire if one team is running away with the division.
Yes, the NFL does change strength of schedule to the extent that they can. IINM, each team plays 6 games against their own division, 4 against teams from the other conference, and 6 against teams from their own conference, out of division. Within those constraints, the out-of-division and out-of-conference games are scheduled to try to match strength.
Sort of, but not entirely. Previous record has only a little to do with scheduling most regular-season games (only 2 games are affected, actually). From football.about.com:
So, the Pats could have the hardest schedule, because they are playing other 1st-place conference teams. But, finishing in 1st place one season does not necessarily mean that you will finish anywhere near 1st place the next. (Ask the Bucs.)
Also, some divisions/conferences are harder than others. The Pats are in the AFC East, with Miami, Buffalo, and the Jets (“New Jersey B”). By most accounts, none of those teams should be particularly tough to beat. But probably the two toughest games on their schedule this year are the Colts and the Chiefs, because the AFC is loaded with talent.
