Congratulations to the Pittsburgh Steelers

Southernman wrote:

I hate to say this guys - 'cos it's a religion for so many - but American Football is sport's ultimate efficiency engine game.

Nope. That's Basketball.

Football is a wargame-AT hybrid.

And baseball is an outdated abstract with no redeeming value in the modern era.

-MMM

Octavian wrote:

Southernman wrote:

I hate to say this guys - 'cos it's a religion for so many - but American Football is sport's ultimate efficiency engine game.

Nope. That's Basketball.

Football is a wargame-AT hybrid.

And baseball is an outdated abstract with no redeeming value in the modern era.

-MMM

Nah. The optimum play is chosen each time and executed to plan and then it all stops so the next optimum play can be chosen and then executed. Kerrist - they have a different person for every conceivable position of task on the field (they have someone just to catch the ball and then he goes off !).

You want to watch Rugby Union (or Rugby League if you just want to see bodies get smashed) for an AT game .... lots of hard non-stop contact, spontaneous actions determined by the player as he goes for it, lots (tons) of blood and broken bones, and the game only stops when someone makes a mistake or kicks the ball out to save their life or the line.

Your's is still good to watch - well the highlights anyway.

Shit - I don't like all this silence, paranoid people would think some sort of retribution for blatant heresy is being planned .....

Southernman wrote:

Shit - I don't like all this silence, paranoid people would think some sort of retribution for blatant heresy is being planned .....

Have you ever played organized american football, where you have a coach calling the plays? I think there is a lot more going on than you think there is. That isn't a knock on you, I watch rugby and Aussie rules football and think I understand it but having never played it on an organized level I am sure I have tons to learn about it too.

You never know what the optimum play is because it always depends on what the other coach is calling on the defensive side. This is basically the opposite of an efficiency engine game, where what the other side does doesn't really matter.

Octavian makes a good point about basketball. Different people have different philosophies about how it should be played, but I would contend that it is difficult to deny that the whole game is about creating high percentage shots to increase your points per possession and increasing possessions. On the other side, prevent your opponent from doing all that. It really is about efficiency.

Aye. I think Octavian has it spot-on with football as an AT/wargame hybrid. There is so much strategizing done by both sides. Testing the opponent's weaknesses, concealing your own, it's like The Art of War out there. I believe the fact that it involves so much deep planning, coupled with individual excellence, is the reason it has so much broad appeal.

The King in Yellow wrote:

Aye. I think Octavian has it spot-on with football as an AT/wargame hybrid. There is so much strategizing done by both sides. Testing the opponent's weaknesses, concealing your own, it's like The Art of War out there. I believe the fact that it involves so much deep planning, coupled with individual excellence, is the reason it has so much broad appeal.

I completely agree. I'd suggest it's closer to the wargame end of the spectrum--among other factors, planning and unit matchup are critical--but the theme and the actual execution of each play are pure Ameritrash.

Bullwinkle wrote:

but the theme and the actual execution of each play are pure Ameritrash.

Yup...thus the hybrid.

You want to watch Rugby Union (or Rugby League if you just want to see bodies get smashed) for an AT game .... lots of hard non-stop contact, spontaneous actions determined by the player as he goes for it

If you don't think there's spontaneous action determined by the player in American Football...I think you missed just about every snap "Big" Ben took in the Super Bowl. Just about every play on the final drive he was improvising. Even more amazing was the play in the first half where he scrambled all around,spun in a circle, and fired a pass right to Heath Miller. Most QBs wouldn't even know Miller was there, let alone make the completion.

Reading the "sport's guy"'s column over on ESPN.com I came to conclusion that what has him and other Boston area media guys poo-poohing the quality of the Super Bowl is two-fold:

1) The question who is the best QB in the league has been asked primarily "Brady or Manning?" the last several years. I think the Steeler win clearly makes Rothlisberger a legitimate 3rd option.

2) The Steelers' 2nd SuperBowl in 4 years, and Patriots loss the previous year, means that New England has gone from being talked about as one of the greastest teams ever, to possibly not even the best team of their era. I'm not saying Pittsburgh can take that away from them yet, but if Pittsburgh wins another title before the Pats do then I think do.