The NFL Superbowl Thread! Back Again With Big Prizes*

NP. Gotchya! I couldn't see your expression.

at 9-7, they were fortunate to nab a wild-card...

I did a makeover of my scorecard. Somehow the scoring process seemed to end up looking 3-dimensional.
7 players have New England not only playing in the Super Bowl but winning it:
George (who has earned 13 points thus far, Rhys (12), Jespah (11), Region (14),
McGentrix (16), Tsarstepan (16) and Thack (18). If those players are correct they will each get 6 points plus those players could get 1 or 2 more points if their picks of the final score are among the closest to the final score.

10 players have New England in the Super Bowl but have another team (New Orleans or Green Bay) winning:
Osso (14), Spendius (14), JPB (11), Edgar (13), Ragman (17), Liontamerx (18),
Cowdoc (16), Mis Cowdoc (16), Coastalrat (14) and Parados (12).
They could pick up a point or two based on the final score.

6 players are on the bench with no team in the Super Bowl:
JohnBoy (11), Mysteryman (6), Tico (5), Ehbeth (13), AndyClubber (15) and Fbaezer (14).
They are done. Toast. Kaput.

But look what they've done since.

Next Year in Marienbad for some of us. (er, that's an old movie reference)

So, what do we got? We have almost 2 weeks to kill before the Super Bowl. And then this thread, like Brigadoon, will disappear.
Perhaps it will come back next year with the start of another regular season.
It was conceived (not by me, by the way) 6 or so years ago as a mindless game for people with little knowledge of football to get together. Sometimes players had sharp disagreements on other issues but those had to be set aside here and going off topic with recipes or whatever was welcomed.
Rule #1 is that it be very simple to play over 17 weeks.

We keep score of correct vs incorrect picks and we tabulate the standings, knowing that there are players who will never ever pick against the Patriots or Steelers or for a team from NY, for example.
The standings thus become largely irrelevant. With that in mind the rule maker never gets upset if someone misses a game or even a weeks' games.
Rule #2 is that the rule maker gets to make up rules.

In the playoffs I asked for suggestions on the scoring and got no responses. I am pretty happy with how it has turned out even though half of the brackets have been broken. 7 players have the chance to prance around screaming "We are #1." Ten other players have a team in the Super Bowl.
As for the points each player get, we will see.

I am open to hearing how the game could be structured in the future.

Just to let any Giants' fans know:

Elizabeth Warren, US Senate candidate for MA on last night's The Daily Show.

Well, there you have it. Game over! The future has spoken!

I'm not catching your drift ... do I have a shot or not?

I'm going to have to start using more emoticons just for you, RM.

If it is a mindless game for those with little knowledge of football then it doesn't matter what the rules are. It becomes like playing snooker with ladies.

But some of us don't play like that in this game. If we should "lighten up" then there are easier ways on A2K to do that.

I think the spread should be used as farmerman suggested.

e.g. Giants v Patriots (-3). If Pats win by 3 or more Pats win. If they win by less than 3 Giants win for this game.

For those playing mindlessly it doesn't matter anyway and for those playing to win it is fairer.

It adds an extra bit of work for you John but it isn't a lot. George will tell you where to look for guidance on what the spreads should be.

Such a rule allows players to miss out games or even weeks.

And it also allows OT to be ignored. The 90 minute score being the one that counts. e.g. if SB goes to OT then Giants (+3) have won for our purposes.

Tie breaker--total points scored in all the weeks games. A second tie breaker the total points scored by home teams.

You could use the odds rather than spreads if you want a game that delays the onset of brain degeneration assuming mental cruddling achieves that desired outcome.

To provide me with a team to shout for in the SB I'm going to have a bet on the Giants.

Thanks for enriching my life Johnnie. NFL was a blank I should never have allowed.

I'll rewrite the rules for American football sometime. Two leagues. 16 teams in each. Home and away. Premiership and First Division. Top 2 in First Division get promoted and bottom 2 in Premiership get demoted. Bottom 2 in First Division have to stand for re-election against applicants from elsewhere. As it is it looks like an aristocracy. Which is un-American. No draft. A transfer market. Talent scouts. Bungs. General cunning and more sex scandals. 30 minutes OT. Then field goal shoot outs.

Superbowl a separate knockout comp with the 16 Premiership teams. Two leg ties. Who plays who drawn out of a hat. No warmed balls.

Prize money. Sleazier cheer leaders. Shorter holidays.

See baseball off.

"If you build it, they will come..."

You make good games Johnboy. Keep at it and the rest shall follow. Just don't let Spendius and his pub betting get to you. I prefer keeping the spread out of it. Then it becomes a gamblers game instead of a fun game.

The last thing I want is to be dealing with point spreads, or making RJB, a gracious volunteer, spend a lot of time doing so, either.

I agree.
I've no interest in participating in any game that is based on spreads OR odds. Nor would I want to make the game ANY more complicated so the administration of the game becomes more work intensive. I see no reason to change much in this game as it's fun this way. There are plenty of other venues for other types of more competitive games

following McG down the road of "you make good games Johnboy".

+1(or 2, as the case may be).

I did the tracking for rjb one year and I know it's not mindless or minimal time. I appreciate everything he's done in pulling these games together every year. He's asked for input on changes, but I think he's done a mighty fine job already.

Adding another NO to changing this game to involve the spread, and another boost re Realjohnboy's handling of the game. Thank you, RJB.

Sheesh!! If it's mindless and just "good fun" what's the point? Why have a winner every week if we are not to want to win? Why have a standings table?

This is very interesting actually. On one level it shows what an American education lasting many years and costing a fortune can achieve in some cases.

It also shows how a handful of people, 5 is it out of 20 odd, can make the running on a thread. As is the case on the evolution threads.



That is not true. spendi's pub betting has nothing to do with the arguments I put forward to improve the game. It is a non sequitur. The arguments stand alone. And rjb doesn't need any advice about what to do or not to do. Or support. He is no bleating furry animal with a thorn in his paw. He's nearly as bad as I am.

It is necessarily a gambling game I'm afraid. With pride instead of cash as the prize. And the goofers off are good for a laugh. OK. I'm up for that. But the scrap at the top of the table has to be serious to some extent.

Preferring to keep the spread out of it needs to be justified. I prefer to keep the spread out of it. That's why I didn't comment on what farmerman had said.

I know all this. I'll confess. George sussed me out. As had farmerman early on. I just took the favourite in every game from off the bookie's web sites for my back-to-back title victories. I had been playing a few weeks before I discovered what a 1st down was. I couldn't go wrong playing against 20 odd people who thought they were better judges than bookies. I know bookies. They put their money where their mouth is and there is a mass of hungry jackals sniffing at it.

And rjb had asked for suggestions possibly due to him understanding from some previous posts of mine why the game needed improving. And I accept whatever he decides.

We could all make our selections using a coin. But would we trust each other. Who is going to pick-um the Packers opponents if the coin says they should. It's fair though if we could trust each other. Could we put everybody on their word of honour that they had not consulted the bookies?

And the spread is very little extra effort. All rjb has to do is correct the final list of winning franchises, it's an odd word that in sport, it jarred my sensibilities the first time I heard it, to take account of it. Statistically, half the games (8) will have a different result for us than from the actual results. And those corrected results are the ones the bookies pay out on. He then proceeds as he does now. 5 minutes extra--tops.

I came to these conclusions as a result of becoming ashamed of having won my back-to-back titles using such a cheap, underhanded trick as I felt I had done on some good folks who are no all that conversant with bookies and betting because various degrees of prohibition of gambling exist in their culture and it is an activity generally looked down upon by well brought up citizens. Except of course when $2 million is bet upon an ad to win 2 points in the opinion polls. It's respectable in that case. But it is gambling. All ads represent a gamble.

And total points scored in the 16 games etc is an efficient tie-breaker and might reduce rjb's efforts by more than the 5 minutes readjusting the results.

I can't claim to have "sussed" you out. You said what you were going to do
when you first started. You were a bit a oblique about it, but you said you
were going to rely on "the form".

I had forgotten George. Thanks for that. I'm not as ashamed now.

There is another trick my suggestions would invalidate. It is the one where somebody a few points in the lead in the standings can pick the same as the nearest rival if he or she waits long enough before entering the lists.

No tricks are any use if spreads are in operation. It wouldn't even be much of a problem if somebody joined in mid-season. If any.

And nobody need be concerned about picking their favourite teams all the time. The bookies have handicapped them to have an equal chance.