taken from a reader @ the sporting news website (
http://www.tsn.com )
[ satire ]
Today, NFL fan Jeff Porche takes a humorous look at why the Rams would be the Super Bowl champs if the outcome had been determined by Olympic judges.
I have heard a lot of talk over the last few days about the latest controversy in figure skating. It has long been my contention that figure skating is not a sport, primarily because of situations like this. Any sport that determines the winner by judges' decisions is not a sport because too much subjectivity/bias is involved. It is too easy to rig the results in these sports.
Add the fact that many Olympic judges still apparently vote on geographical and ideological lines drawn out by the Cold War (judges from Russia, China, Poland and the Ukraine voted for the Russian pair Monday night), and you have a recipe for grave injustices.
But enough of that. I could argue for days about everything that is wrong with judged sports, especially in Olympic competition. Instead, I am taking another approach. In order to illustrate how idiotic Olympic judging can become, I am wondering what would happen if we determined the winner of this year's Super Bowl by Olympic-style judging.
Here is how the event would take place: The Rams and Patriots would play a regular, 60-minute, four-quarter football game. However, when the competition is finished, the final score would not automatically determine the winner. Instead, a group of judges representing each of the 31 existing NFL teams would cast a vote, based on what they saw, to determine the "true" winner.
Here is how it would play out. On the field, the Patriots outscore the Rams 20-17. When the game is over, the Patriots are certain that they will be the winners. However, they head to the locker room in order to wait for the judges' final decisions. But when they get there, they discover that something very curious is going on: All of the voters from the NFC have determined that the Rams won the Super Bowl!
Their decisions are based on one or more of the following criteria:
* The Rams have demonstrated throughout the course of the year that they are the better team.
* The NFC has historicallly been the better conference, considering that it has lost only two Super Bowls since the mid-'80s.
* While the Rams did commit more errors than the Patriots, the degree of difficulty associated with their "vertical offense" was greater.
* While the Patriots' offensive performance was technically perfect, its relatively conservative nature was not aesthetically pleasing or as challenging as the offensive maneuvers the Rams attempted.
* The Rams gained more yards than the Patriots.
* Kurt Warner's touchdown pass to Ricky Proehl was "prettier" than Tom Brady's touchdown pass to David Patten.
However, based on this outcome, the Patriots still would win on judges' votes, 16-15, because the AFC has one more team than the NFC. But all the NFC judges would have to do is convince one AFC judge to change sides, and victory is theirs.
This is where the Raiders' judge comes in.
The Raiders are obviously still angry with the Patriots. After all, they were robbed of a victory by the Patriots two weeks earlier because of the "tuck" decision. By their rationale, the Patriots don't even belong there. I'm sure the Raiders would be glad to go along with the fix. And if they don't, there is always the possibility that the Jets' judge would play ball. All you would have to do is remind him that Bill Belichick left his team at the altar two years ago.
And there you have it. By my estimations, the Rams would have defeated the Patriots in a Super Bowl, based on judges' decision, by a score of either 16-15 or 17-14. Congratulations to the Rams! I think I am going to recognize them as Super Bowl champs from now on.
[ / satire ]
btw, GO CANADA!
