Watching the Super Bowl when you’re not a fan of either team {Sports Fans please}

The Game Room
61

Lifelong Giants fan here and I’m also a lifelong Mets and Devils fan, so I have zero love for any and all Philly teams. This was a rough Super Bowl.

I was cheering for either a KC 3-peat because of the historic significance (I don’t understand the Mahomes hate, he’s a beast and if you don’t think so you need to get over it) or a Saquon led Eagles victory.

Still, I was fine with Saquon getting a ring because my desire to see him succeed outweighed my hatred of the Eagles. It helps that he seemed to have zero interest in going to Philly and until someone tells me otherwise I lay the blame solely on our front office. Additionally, it’s hard to ignore the simple fact that the Eagles are FAR better equipped to play to his strengths and let him shine. That was painfully obvious in their first game of the regular season.

Growing up the Chiefs were an “always a bridesmaid” franchise that would lose early in the playoffs every year. Then they actually started winning and the fanbase turned into terrible people, so I don’t mind seeing them humbled.

I also find the Taylor Swift hate completely ridiculous and absurd, so I make it very clear that I’m not a KC hater because TV stations cut to Taylor for a few seconds during a game.

As far as the division goes, I’m largely indifferent to the Commanders and I never really thought about the Cowboys until I moved to Texas. Honestly, I only knew 4 Cowboys fans before I moved down here and 3 of them were related. Doesn’t mean I want the Cowboys to win but they don’t bring out the same level of hatred as Philly does. I laugh every time the Cowboys blow it in the post season so I don’t want anyone to think I would ever okay with them winning. I would absolutely root for Washington if they made it now that Snyder is no longer running things.

62

I’m not entirely sure I’m parsing that penultimate sentence correctly. But in terms of divisional standing, games against the other conference are slightly more important than games against your own conference.

6 divisional games (common)
4 conference games (common)
4 games vs other conference (common)
2 strength of schedule games in conference (not common)
1 strength of schedule game vs other conference (not common)

The first tiebreaker for division standings – record in common games – uses 4 of your 6 (67%) conference games but 4 of your 5 (80%) out-of-conference games.

This was even more pronounced when it was still a 16-game schedule. In terms of the primary divisional tiebreaker, every out of conference game counted but only 2/3rds of the in-conference ones (outside your division) mattered.

63

If you win your division you are in the postseason no matter how you match up against the rest of the conference. And you can even be a higher seed than a team with a much better record.

64

I don’t think I parsed your post properly and then responded to something you didn’t say.

65

I’ve already demonstrated in this thread that sometimes I arblegarble so I am going to assume you aren’t the problem.

66

I’m not talking about a rivalry between teams. I’m talking about a rivalry between leagues or conferences. And they would play each other, just once per year. Like it used to be.

There could still be rivalry between teams but between teams in the same league, division, or conference.

The way it’s been done the last couple decades there might as well not be separate leagues or conferences. Everything might as well just be seeded which is boring!

67

It’s already been explained why that’s complete nonsense.

68

All that was explained was your opinion of it, with which I respectfully disagree.
No interleague play during the regular season worked just fine for almost a century.

69

Assuming you’re talking about major league baseball, it did. And, for a long time, the NL and AL operated far more separately than they do now: different baseballs, different strike zones, separate umpiring crews, league presidents who had more power, etc., not to mention one league having the DH, and the other not.

In the case of the NFL (and the AFL), they really only operated separately for ten years, and even then, the final few years of the AFL saw increasing cooperation with the NFL (the Super Bowl, a joint draft), before the full merger in 1970.

That said, as a kid who started following football in the mid-late 1970s, I do recall the AFC and the NFC being seen as having different “personalities,” as it were, at that time, which were holdovers from the two leagues: NFC teams were more traditional and conservative, while AFC teams were seen as being more experimental and wide-open.

Two examples of that: greater emphasis on passing (as implemented by Don Coryell with the Chargers, and Bill Walsh, while he was OC of the Bengals, before he became the head coach of the 49ers), and the early adopters of the 3-4 defensive formation (Dolphins, Patriots, Raiders, Broncos), were all in the AFC.

But, in the years since, any distinctions between the conferences has been long lost.

70

Yes, and now what separates them is two independent playoff ranking groups.

You’re disagreeing with facts. You’re ignoring the fact that the two conferences are completely segregated where the postseason is concerned. When you say:

The “boring” part is an opinion, and I respect that. But you’re contradicting yourself when you say that you want them separated yet we might as well have them all seeded together. No, the fact that they’re not is why the conferences matter, and that isn’t a matter of opinion.

71

That sounds like the European soccer final in 2016 between France and Portugal. I can’t stand the French national team, or Cristiano Ronaldo, so my best outcome was for Ronaldo to go off injured and Portugal to win the title without him. That’s exactly what ended up happening :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

72

Kyrie Irving just tore his ACL the other day and will be out for a while. Not career-ending, but it’s good news nonetheless.

73

Don’t think this is the right thread for this post.

And it’s probably not good news for Kyrie.

74

It was in response to my post (#50) and @Pheoinix’s post (#71) in this thread. And it’s good news in that it happened to an antisemitic conspiracy theorist.

75

Point taken. I withdraw my complaint.

76

I’m a journalist, so I’m always rooting for finishing up in regulation. Regular fans might get a charge out of some bonus football, but we’ve got deadlines to meet. Of course, since I don’t work on Sundays at the moment, it’s not as personally important as before, but I do want my colleagues to be able to report a final score.