- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Do you like dynasties or parity?
Posted on 9/4/25 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 9/4/25 at 1:53 pm
A lot of people were tired of seeing the Broncos, Redskins, Giants, Packers, Cowboys, Niners in the Super Bowl every year in the 80s and 90s
Same thing with the Patriots and Chiefs in the 21st century.
You like that or do you like new blood, new teams?
I want to see someone else other than the Chiefs and the 49ers in a Super Bowl this year....
Same thing with the Patriots and Chiefs in the 21st century.
You like that or do you like new blood, new teams?
I want to see someone else other than the Chiefs and the 49ers in a Super Bowl this year....
19
Posted on 9/4/25 at 1:53 pm to Astros 1998
People will say parity but then nobody watches a Thunder/Pacers finals.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 1:58 pm to TheWalrus
True.
Or the ones who tire of Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Phillies, but no one watches Rangers/Cardinals 2011.
Or the ones who tire of Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Phillies, but no one watches Rangers/Cardinals 2011.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:05 pm to Astros 1998
I like dynasties, if it's my team winning championships.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:09 pm to Astros 1998
quote:
Rangers/Cardinals 2011.
Lol that was one of the best WS of all-time...
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:14 pm to Indiangensing
True, but most people did not watch until Game 7.
Two mid-market franchises don't garner eyeballs.
Which is why baseball is in the mess it is in.
Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Mets, Phillies, Braves are vital for baseball in October.
No one is tuning into the Brewers, Rays, Blue Jays.
Two mid-market franchises don't garner eyeballs.
Which is why baseball is in the mess it is in.
Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Mets, Phillies, Braves are vital for baseball in October.
No one is tuning into the Brewers, Rays, Blue Jays.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:59 pm to Astros 1998
quote:
A lot of people were tired of seeing the Broncos, Redskins, Giants, Packers, Cowboys, Niners in the Super Bowl every year in the 80s and 90s
Calling any NFL team a "dynasty" is a bit of a stretch. What annoyed fans in the 80s and 90s was that the AFC was stubbornly incompetent and couldn't put up a fight in the Super Bowl against whatever NFC team(s) had put it all together that year. The NFL was crazy popular but the Super Bowl, which was hyped to no end, was always a let down.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:01 pm to Astros 1998
quote:
I want to see someone else other than the Chiefs and the 49ers in a Super Bowl this year....
It definitely won’t be the 49ers
I’d take Bills/Ravens/Bengals over the Chiefs
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:05 pm to Astros 1998
Imo I lean towards dynasties but especially in individual sports. I think there's just something about knowing you're seeing something historic vs. just another year of bland nobodies.
Tiger Woods sucked all the air out of the room winning like 6x in a row, but people tuned in because they knew they were watching a living legend. People still blow their loads over the 2000 US Open even though it was a total snoozer.
Baseball - a stud pitcher or a historic batting pace draws tons of eyeballs
Basketball - the East ran through LeBron for years and years etc.
That said, you do need some parity, otherwise all the other guys have no reason to care
Tiger Woods sucked all the air out of the room winning like 6x in a row, but people tuned in because they knew they were watching a living legend. People still blow their loads over the 2000 US Open even though it was a total snoozer.
Baseball - a stud pitcher or a historic batting pace draws tons of eyeballs
Basketball - the East ran through LeBron for years and years etc.
That said, you do need some parity, otherwise all the other guys have no reason to care
This post was edited on 9/4/25 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:06 pm to Astros 1998
What about teams like the 80s Broncos or 90s Bills and Braves? Do people enjoy watching hyped teams get to the summit and fail?
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:14 pm to TheWalrus
quote:
People will say parity but then nobody watches a Thunder/Pacers finals.
#'s and viewers always tell the story of what people like...NBA exploded from a shiteshow because of the 80s Lakers/Celtics dynasties.... Jordan grew it further in the 90s with the Bulls dynasty.
Only sport where it aggressively turns fans off is CFB...because there's a million freaking' teams and a million fan bases; fans who don't want to see the same 2-3 media darlings every year because, everyone only cares about their own team...unless you're an SEC rant staple, then you bandwagon an entire Conference like a jellyfish with no spine.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:24 pm to Astros 1998
Last Subway Series (2000) had one of the lowest rated WS ever. Mets/Royals was a snoozefest. one Cards WS against anyone not named the Red Sox in this century, 2006, had more eyeballs than most matchups.
This post was edited on 9/4/25 at 3:27 pm
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:28 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
yep in pro sports I love a dynasty
in college sports...frick that, especially in CFB. I want parity there
in college sports...frick that, especially in CFB. I want parity there
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:37 pm to Astros 1998
Last Phillies WS: 6.1
Last Braves WS: 6.5
Doesn’t exactly scream needle moving to me.
Last Braves WS: 6.5
Doesn’t exactly scream needle moving to me.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 3:49 pm to Bigdawgb
people claim to hate dynasties but the NBA had its 2nd peak in 2015-19 when it was Lebron or the Warriors winning everything
since then, 7 different champions in 7 years, cant say they were more popular than the previous eras
since then, 7 different champions in 7 years, cant say they were more popular than the previous eras
Posted on 9/4/25 at 4:07 pm to Astros 1998
quote:
Do you like dynasties or parity?
Do you like F1 or Nascar?
Posted on 9/4/25 at 4:11 pm to TheWalrus
quote:
People will say parity but then nobody watches a Thunder/Pacers finals.
Exactly. Which is why in every sport I always favor blue bloods and dynasties.
The last newcomer I rooted for was Clemson against Nebraska in 1981.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 4:12 pm to Astros 1998
quote:
Do you like dynasties or parity?
I just want to see some good football on both side of the ball.
quote:
I want to see someone else other than the Chiefs and the 49ers in a Super Bowl this year....
I 'member when the Chiefs were the breath of fresh air from the Patriots and now we are stuck with Travis Swift and idiotic State Farm commercials.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 4:13 pm to Madking
Not the 90s Bills or Braves.
But, yeah I enjoyed watching the Yankees get beat by Arizona and Florida (the only Florida team I've ever liked).
But, yeah I enjoyed watching the Yankees get beat by Arizona and Florida (the only Florida team I've ever liked).
Posted on 9/4/25 at 4:15 pm to Astros 1998
Real fans of sports love parity. Media and casual viewers love familiarity.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News