- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Does the NFL have a parity issue?
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:04 pm
You always hear about how the NFL has the most parity of any league, but 16 of the last 20 Super Bowl appearances are from 5 teams (Chiefs, Patriots, Rams, Eagles, 49ers) in a 32 team league. The games are close but it’s the same handful of teams every time, including 2 rematches (almost 3 had the Rams beaten Seattle).
18
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:06 pm to red sox fan 13
It has a quarterback issue
There are a ton of teams with QBs that suck
There are a ton of teams with QBs that suck
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:07 pm to red sox fan 13
There is a parity of raw talent, but certainly not coaching. The NFL is designed so that the worst teams have the best chances to draft the best players. The only issue is that the worst teams are typically the worst because they are the most poorly run organizations.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:08 pm to red sox fan 13
Honestly it’s like when I was a kid and it was always the 49ers, cowboys, and bills on the other side. Oddly familiar.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:09 pm to JetsetNuggs
quote:
There are a ton of teams with QBs that suck
And are paying a ton of money too. Additionally, the restructuring of the pay scale has resulted in fewer veteran players and more younger players so that individuals like qb and a wr can make massive amounts from the cap.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:13 pm to red sox fan 13
If by "parity" they mean game fixing, then yes, they have a parity issue.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:14 pm to red sox fan 13
No, the NFL has an ownership issue. There's a reason for the most part the same teams are at the top of the draft. Combine that with the league rules that heighten the difference in the top QB's and you get a few teams that dominate.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:15 pm to red sox fan 13
I think you have a mix of generational players/coaches (Brady/Belichek, Mahomes/Reid) and extremely well run franchises (Eagles, 49ers, Seahawks, Rams) from both selection of coaches and front offices putting together teams.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:18 pm to red sox fan 13
quote:
5 teams (Chiefs, Patriots, Rams, Eagles, 49ers)
Chiefs finished 6-11 this year & Patriots were 4-13 last year
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:30 pm to JetsetNuggs
quote:
It has a quarterback issue
It’s this. Mahomes, Brady, Manning, Roethlisburger have QB’d the afc team in something like 17 of the last 20 superbowls.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 12:34 pm to red sox fan 13
1) Other than Kraft (and McDaniels, I guess) the Patriots are completely different now than those Brady/Belichick teams. Do they have even a single player who was on the team that beat the Rams? I don’t really consider it the same team at all, even though it’s technically the same organization.
2) Even the Eagles had a different coach / QB combo for their most recent two appearances than their first (though I’d say there was more overall organizational continuity between the Pederson/Sirianni regimes than between the old Pats and new Pats). And the Rams/49ers both had different starting QBs in each of their appearances, so I think the NFC has been a little more diverse, and the AFC largely dominated by a couple of elite HC / QB combos.
3) Parity is both good and bad. You want all teams to have a chance at a successful rebuild into contention in a relatively-short amount of time… but it can’t / shouldn’t be just dumb luck. Bad organizations shouldn’t (and can’t…) be handed a contender just because.
2) Even the Eagles had a different coach / QB combo for their most recent two appearances than their first (though I’d say there was more overall organizational continuity between the Pederson/Sirianni regimes than between the old Pats and new Pats). And the Rams/49ers both had different starting QBs in each of their appearances, so I think the NFC has been a little more diverse, and the AFC largely dominated by a couple of elite HC / QB combos.
3) Parity is both good and bad. You want all teams to have a chance at a successful rebuild into contention in a relatively-short amount of time… but it can’t / shouldn’t be just dumb luck. Bad organizations shouldn’t (and can’t…) be handed a contender just because.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:10 pm to red sox fan 13
Think I see 6 different teams on NFC side. Seems pretty good to me. Last 10 years also includes the greatest QB of all time and pretty damn good one in KC which is skewing the AFC side. KC era may be over too
This post was edited on 1/28/26 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:11 pm to red sox fan 13
I see six different NFC representatives in 10 years. That's decent parity.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:17 pm to red sox fan 13
It's not a parity issue. It's a bias issue.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:24 pm to red sox fan 13
Look at the list of teams that represented the AFC from SB 5 all the way to SB 19. That list is dominated by Steelers, Dolphins and Raiders. With the Bengals and Broncos each making one appearance during that 15 year stretch. Then from SB 21 through SB 33, Broncos with 5 appearances and Bills with 4. Only Chargers, Steelers and Patriots breaking that up with only one appearance each.
Similar trend in the NFC from 1981-1995 with 49ers, Redskins, Giants and Cowboys dominating. Only the Bears infiltrated that time period, with one appearance.
Similar trend in the NFC from 1981-1995 with 49ers, Redskins, Giants and Cowboys dominating. Only the Bears infiltrated that time period, with one appearance.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:35 pm to red sox fan 13
Pretty clear delliniation;
NFC = stacked (peak SEC type) rosters with solid, but not great QBs
vs
AFC: All time, all time QBs with great defensive coordinators.
NFC = stacked (peak SEC type) rosters with solid, but not great QBs
vs
AFC: All time, all time QBs with great defensive coordinators.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 1:41 pm to St Augustine
quote:
Honestly it’s like when I was a kid and it was always the 49ers, cowboys, and bills on the other side. Oddly familiar.
Yeah this isn't remotely like the 80s and 90s...parity at least evolved to where both Conferences were competitive... Back then was the constant complaint days where the defacto Super Bowl was the NFC Champ game.
Niners, Washington, Giants, then Cowboys, then Niners-Cowboys, then Packers, then...Denver broke through.
You had 15 years in a row where the NFC won the Super Bowl with the Raiders being the only bright spot for the AFC during that grossly imbalanced era.
This post was edited on 1/28/26 at 1:43 pm
Posted on 1/28/26 at 2:05 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
You had 15 years in a row where the NFC won the Super Bowl with the Raiders being the only bright spot for the AFC during that grossly imbalanced era.
And the 13 years prior to that, the AFC won 11 of those SBs, with the Cowboys being the only NFC winner during that stretch.
Posted on 1/28/26 at 2:14 pm to red sox fan 13
At least it ain’t the premier league.
Last 10 champions
Leicester City 1x
Chelsea 1x
Liverpool 2x
Manchester City 6x
Or La Liga
Atletico Madrid 1x
Real Madrid 4x
Barcelona 5x
Last 10 champions
Leicester City 1x
Chelsea 1x
Liverpool 2x
Manchester City 6x
Or La Liga
Atletico Madrid 1x
Real Madrid 4x
Barcelona 5x
This post was edited on 1/28/26 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 1/28/26 at 2:28 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:Half of them from 1 division
I see six different NFC representatives in 10 years. That's decent parity.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News