underrated players and underrated teams in the NFL - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

underrated players and underrated teams in the NFL

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby waltb87 » Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:13 pm

hmmmm......
waltb87
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 267
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: In the press box

Postby maddog60 » Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:59 pm

Underrated team, Denver. These guys are always in the thick of the playoffs, and it seems like people aren't even considering what adding a WR of Javon Walker's caliber could do for such a potent offense.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby teacupwoozy » Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:06 pm

Free Bagel wrote:
biju wrote:
waltb87 wrote:well how about this....teams that performed well and really hasnt been noticed by the public


Well, that could be restated as "Teams that performed well but the media didn't care because they weren't New England, Indianapolis or Terrell Owens."

East Coast biased media sucks.


Oh good lord quit whining (this also goes out to the two jesters that posted after continuing the whinfest.

Yes, the source of all of this is the ever-phantom east coast bias. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that New England has won three super bowls in 5 years, or that Indy had a dominating season with an offense that lights up the scoreboards (and hence draws attention), or that TO is always doing something to get himself in the news.

How many times did we hear the words USC, Reggie Bush, or Matt Leinart on ESPN this year? Is it because of some mythical west coast bias that I can just make up to solve all my inadequacies (which apparently include spelling) and get everyone to blindly roll along with? No, it's because they were a great team with a great offense. Was TO not still all over the news when he was in San Francisco (as far west as it gets)?

Good lord people I don't get riled up often on here but get the f*ck over it. The only bias against west coasters there is is people that don't want to hear them whine about how every statement other than "XXXX west coast team/player is the greatest team/player ever" (which by the way we've heard plenty of lately with USC/Bush/Leinart so I don't know how you people are STILL getting your panties in bunch) is obviously biased against their poor, persecuted souls.

Sure, Seattle wasn't getting the gobs of media attention down the stretch of the regular season the 3 time Super Bowl champs (in the last 4 years) and the consensus best team in the league were, but neither were the Steelers and last I checked they're now Super Bowl champs. I guess they should make up the "Quaker bias" so they can keep up with all the west coast clowns crying and moaning everytime they're not the center of the universe for perfectly legitimate reasons.


Oh pull your head out of your bagel. The Patriots were the consensus best team last year? That alone proves the point... They played some really crappy football last year, being the best in that division at only 10-6? Yeah... Plus had any of their ball washers actually been watching their games...

We were talking NFL and profit teams. College football is a whole different story. USC is an extremely affluent school in a weak conference. Hence its attention, almost the same as the "east coast" bias which is actually a team revenue bias.

It takes players the caliber of Jerry Rice, and Terrel Owens, and Terrel Davis, and John Elway to pull attention from mainstay teams. The Giants were given too much credit last year, media attention was still directed towards the eagles and maybe coming out 8-8 or 9-7 late in the season. While people were still questioning whether Sean Alexander could get it done. Or denver could beat the pats who were just not a playoff team last year.

Hell everyone is easy heralding Miami for their terrific second half... Where the beat...

Week 8- New Orleans (there is a shocker)
Week 9- Taken out by a mediocre Atlanta
Week 10- Ugly loss to the pats where both teams played like crap
Week 11- DOMINATED by the BROWNS??
Week 12- Took out Oakland (again a real shocker)
Week 13- Beat BUFFALO by one point?? woof
Week 14- Beat the Chargers by 2 (the only worthwhile victory IMO)
Week 15- Beat the Jets... hehehe
Week 16- Beat Tennessee... HAHAHA
Week 17- Beat the Pats backup squad by 2....

It isn't really an east coast bias I suppose but it is a revenue/frontrunner bias. The pats shouldn't have had as much praise heaped upon them as they did. This buzz around the phins at the end of the season certainly wasn't deserved... Same can be said about the Eagles, and the Giants, and Cowboys... etc.
teacupwoozy
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 271
Joined: 2 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Alkaholik » Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:14 pm

stomperrob wrote:
biju wrote:
waltb87 wrote:well how about this....teams that performed well and really hasnt been noticed by the public


Well, that could be restated as "Teams that performed well but the media didn't care because they weren't New England, Indianapolis or Terrell Owens."

East Coast biased media sucks.


Especially the Seahawks last year, everyone kept writing them off - no one seemed to believe in them right up until they won the NFC Championship.


its true, but if there was a team who had a huge non-playoff streak and hadnt won a playoff game in 20+ years, i would somewhat too write them off, but it helps because their underrated and i'm sure sometimes teams may over look them.

another reason why the hawks arnt noticed is because they are on an island in the middle corner of nowhere.....what i mean is that they dont have any other NFL team close to them, the closest nfl team is some 1000+ miles away in San Francisco.
Alkaholik
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerTrivia Time Trial ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 7631
(Past Year: 22)
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: wherever Jack takes me....

Postby Free Bagel » Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:34 pm

teacupwoozy wrote:The Patriots were the consensus best team last year? That alone proves the point... They played some really crappy football last year, being the best in that division at only 10-6? Yeah... Plus had any of their ball washers actually been watching their games...


No, the Colts were. It was mentioned that the Seahawks didn't get as much attention going into the playoffs as the Patriots and the Colts. I said of course they didn't get as much attention as the team that had won 3 of the last 4 Super Bowls (Patriots) or the team that was the consensus best team in the league (Colts). I could see how that could've been read differently though.

We were talking NFL and profit teams. College football is a whole different story. USC is an extremely affluent school in a weak conference. Hence its attention, almost the same as the "east coast" bias which is actually a team revenue bias.

It takes players the caliber of Jerry Rice, and Terrel Owens, and Terrel Davis, and John Elway to pull attention from mainstay teams. The Giants were given too much credit last year, media attention was still directed towards the eagles and maybe coming out 8-8 or 9-7 late in the season. While people were still questioning whether Sean Alexander could get it done.


For starters, USC certainly applies as the terms mentioned were EXACTLY "east coast bias". Secondly, the team revenue bias doesn't really hold a candle either. The Patriots and Colts GOT revenue and GOT media attention by winning. Neither had any particularly high loyalty or high revenue prior to it. All Boston cared about was the Red Sox. Brady and Manning brought them attention just like Montana and Elway brought attention to the teams you mentioned, and of course winning and scoring lots of points didn't hurt.

Do you really think Indianapolis is some cash giant that Seattle isn't? That St Louis is some cash giant that Los Angeles isn't (note the Rams lack of media attention when they sucked in a big market, and the oodles and oodles beyond oodles of attention they got when they were exciting and good around 2000 in the smaller St Louis market).

They were paying attention to Philly? Of course they were, they went to the NFC Championship all 3 years prior and had a huge drama story going on with Owens (the same guy who brought the same media attention to the poor, persecuted west coast). People were doubting Shaun Alexander? You mean like people are doubting Larry Johnson now? Or like people are saying Peyton can't win the big game? Or like people were saying Mcnabb couldn't handle the pressure when he lost the Super Bowl? Or like people are saying Bush can't be a star at the pro level?

New York Giants? What TV were you watching? I don't recall seeing all that much about them at all outside of news about Eli who could be the next best thing at QB, and even that will likely not even be a sliver of the coverage Reggie Bush is going to get this year on the Saints and their historically terrible revenue. Hell, I've seen exponentially more news this offseason on the Saints than I have on giant market teams like the Giants or Jets. The media goes where the stories are, and these west coast whiners as I will now call them have this incredibly annoying nack for assuming that any time the big news story isn't about their favorite team it must be because some is being biased against them, because it couldn't possibly be that there is a more interesting story somewhere else or that maybe they're just not as good as they think they are (though Seattle was in this case).

But hey, the west coast whiners can go on believing that when NFL primetime comes on on the east coast we have a special version of it that shows Patriots highlights for 58 minutes and then just scrolls through the west coast scores in the last 30 seconds while at the same time Chris Berman's alter ego pronounces after every score "not that it really matters because nobody cares about those guys anyway."
Image
Free Bagel
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertMock(ing) DrafterCafe Musketeer
Posts: 8495
Joined: 25 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Titletown, FL

Postby stomperrob » Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:42 pm

Free Bagel wrote:
biju wrote:
waltb87 wrote:well how about this....teams that performed well and really hasnt been noticed by the public


Well, that could be restated as "Teams that performed well but the media didn't care because they weren't New England, Indianapolis or Terrell Owens."

East Coast biased media sucks.


Oh good lord quit whining (this also goes out to the two jesters that posted after continuing the whinfest.

Yes, the source of all of this is the ever-phantom east coast bias. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that New England has won three super bowls in 5 years, or that Indy had a dominating season with an offense that lights up the scoreboards (and hence draws attention), or that TO is always doing something to get himself in the news.

How many times did we hear the words USC, Reggie Bush, or Matt Leinart on ESPN this year? Is it because of some mythical west coast bias that I can just make up to solve all my inadequacies (which apparently include spelling) and get everyone to blindly roll along with? No, it's because they were a great team with a great offense. Was TO not still all over the news when he was in San Francisco (as far west as it gets)?

Good lord people I don't get riled up often on here but get the f*ck over it. The only bias against west coasters there is is people that don't want to hear them whine about how every statement other than "XXXX west coast team/player is the greatest team/player ever" (which by the way we've heard plenty of lately with USC/Bush/Leinart so I don't know how you people are STILL getting your panties in bunch) is obviously biased against their poor, persecuted souls.

Sure, Seattle wasn't getting the gobs of media attention down the stretch of the regular season the 3 time Super Bowl champs (in the last 4 years) and the consensus best team in the league were, but neither were the Steelers and last I checked they're now Super Bowl champs. I guess they should make up the "Quaker bias" so they can keep up with all the west coast clowns crying and moaning everytime they're not the center of the universe for perfectly legitimate reasons.


Since there were 3 of us that responded after that "East coast" comment, I'm not sure if I'm considered one of the the two whining jesters who should get the f*** over it. My comment was not in response to the "East coast" media comment, but to Walt's comment about teams doing well but not being noticed - lots in the media, and indeed even at the Cafe, were writing off the Seahawks regular season saying they had an easy schedule and their record wasn't indicative of what an average team they really were and for that reason they wrote them off as not having any chance at advancing in the playoffs when they faced real competition.
I think you're reading a little too much into the responses - lighten up!
Image
Fantasy Football: "Luck is where preparation meets opportunity"
stomperrob
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 13579
(Past Year: 138)
Joined: 19 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Steeler Nation!!!

Postby teacupwoozy » Tue Jul 25, 2006 10:25 pm

I imagine the biggest issue the west coaster "whiners" have is the blackouts on home games actually and lack of press because the games simply don't have any medium through which to watch the games... The west coast is essentially the MLB of pro football... Jax is the only east coast teams that has their games blacked out and that was because it was always in an ill fated location...

Yes i read your comment differently, appologies. I thought the Colts were considered a Midwestern team... Same with St.Louis...

Regardless. USC doesn't apply to anything as it is a college football team. College football is simply a farming system. Attention was paid to the Colts not because of an east coast bias (again i don't think they can be considered east coast) but because of a record breaking performance and possibly winning all of their regular season games. I didn't list the Colts because I don't consider them part of the equation. Socio-economically USC applies exactly to the "east coast bias" that was mentioned. The east coast has greater concentrations of disposable income then anything west. USC is within reach of HUGE amounts of disposable income. But tickets are also affordable and the students themselves are affluent and in for big futures... No one wants a pro-football team (specifically the populace) because of the way it would affect their city, traffic, violence, incidents of drunk driving etc...

I am sure anyone from boston would disagree that the Sox were all that mattered. The pats have had high ticket sales and media coverage even when the blew for years and years.

The reason is actually socio-economic, as well as sociological. The 9ers have had good coverage and such when successful because of the disposable income available to their fan base. When they started playing poorly the sales dropped. Because San Francisco is largely an arts focused area. Dissapointment in football would easily turn the residents back to other areas of interest and dissuade people travelling to the stadium from going. Do you really see that happening in New England.

Distance is a huge factor as well. The island theory about Seattle is a sound one. Seattle too is a more art focused population as a generality (music and culture rule the day, but there is a greater class mix then in San Fransico as well as a greater interest mix)

San Diego with LT, great play by Brees, the best TE in the NFL... still poor ticket sales. Still blah media coverage.

Oakland during their recent super bowl run, with Jerry Rice and Porter, and Brown... Not much media, meh tix...

Denver had a solid fan base with a personality like Elway who was almost untouchable by controversy. Davis too, but when was the last time the media was kind to them. Did jake the snake choke, he sure did. But the fact that so many felt the pats would win, three year champs or not... Revenue, ticket sales, whats good for money... Bronco's win meh, Pats win its big money.

Pats made awful moves this offseason. Hurt their team. Yet I still see more worry about how Alexander is going to perform without Hutch, and New England spots above Seattle on the power rankings.... Seahawks had a great offseason... explain that? because of the dynasty? dynasty fell apart against denver last year. now its homerism. and a larger base of fans money and media coverage.

Rams again aren't an east coast team but... the story there was the rise of warner more than anything else. Thats one of those underdog stories that the media eats up.

New England isn't really known for scoring oodles of points. New England at the height of their power was just boring to watch, it was a chess game playing them most of the time? Brady is mr. consistant more than mr. flash... Last year was his closest to superstar in terms of flash and really showing how he could take the reigns and win games by himself.

Indy as it gets better should easily out produce Seattle in ticket sales. Again Seattle has a great arts tilt to its population, in addition it has other sports to draw that disposable income. Indiana has basketball. Very little culture. Smaller amounts of disposable income, so the ticket sales should increase for the colts in defference to their basketball sales and that will be that.

I have no idea how you can say the Giants didn't get huge amounts of coverage, even when warner was under center. Even when the Giants were crap for years they were media draws. Any new york team will always have more media coverage then most.

Bush was the human highlight reel who went to an unexpected team that has all new shiny parts after being devestated by a hurricane. And aren't the Saints and east coast team :)

The media goes where the money is. Tear jerker or underdog stories will increase the pull for small amounts of time. But the truth is east coast teams get more respect and alot of undeserved respect than other teams. Hell I think I heard more about the Ravens then seattle last year, and this year... why? Sociology my friend. It isn't whining. The hardcore fans have legitimate beef.

It isn't that they never get attention, but rarely is it in any kind of realistic balance based upon performance. Talk about Seattle who's games get blacked out so you lose viewers who don't know or care about the team? Or a tri-state area team that always sells tix where people know every player. One gets alot of channels flipped the other holds the interest of the people. Wonder why the draft was in Rock center?
teacupwoozy
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 271
Joined: 2 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Free Bagel » Tue Jul 25, 2006 10:44 pm

This is insane. You make a collected argument but I honestly can't see a single thing in it I can agree with in even the slightest bit. Of course all the talk around here is about how Alexander will do without Hutch, this is a fantasy football forum and Alexander is a top 3 pick. In the media Alexander is one of the best RBs in the NFL and no one even mentions Hutchinson, there's no relevance at all.

STL, Indy, etc were simply examples of teams that aren't in the east coast glory land and still got plenty of attention. But you're probably right, I'm sure STL occupied half of every sportscenter show in 2000 because of the rise of Time Warner, I know that's why I watched them and it certainly had nothing to do with Marshall Marshall Marshall or the 40 points they were putting on the scoreboard every week :rolleyes:

New Orleans was brought up because you specifically mentioned smaller market teams.

San Diego, KC, Oakland, they all get just as much coverage as east coast teams in similar situations. Heck, over the last few years I've seen more of the AFC West than any other conference out there. Not bad for a group of teams that haven't produced a team in the Super Bowl in a decade.

Sure, many people had NE over Denver (and many others had it the other way around), but that had more to do with Brady and Bellicheck's playoff records vs. Jake Plummer's. I remember I wanted to bet on Denver and a friend of mine convinced me not to by stressing that it was Jake Plummer vs. Tom Brady in the playoffs, not by telling me that NE is located further east or is on sportscenter more often. But hey, if there's this cray bias that we all use to pick the wrong teams you west coasters should be rich off sports betting by now, right?

I just don't get it, the west coast guys see someone pick an east coast team to win a game or to do well and immediately think it's this phantom east coast bias nonsense. If the Dolphins were located in Alaska people would still be high on them going into this year (too high IMO, but that's another post), and if the 49ers were in New York people still wouldn't think they're going to win the Super Bowl this year (see: New York Jets). There was plenty of coverage of the Bolts last year and I personally had them pegged to win the Super Bowl (from *gasp* a Floridian).

Oakland didn't get much coverage during their super bowl run? Huh? They got a whollllleee loooottt more coverage than the east coast Bucs.

Give some people some credit, no one thought Seattle wasn't going far in the playoffs last year because they live in an artsy community on an island, people thought that because they had a history of flopping in the playoffs and had a very similar team to the one that had been looking good while losing the last few years.

All this other stuff is so irrelevant I can't even begin to describe it.
Image
Free Bagel
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertMock(ing) DrafterCafe Musketeer
Posts: 8495
Joined: 25 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Titletown, FL

Postby teacupwoozy » Tue Jul 25, 2006 10:54 pm

This was about media bias not personal... i dont even know what you are arguing at this point. are you aware of the definition of a bias? we are not talking about a rule, we are talking about given 2 situations the media will skirt towards an east coast team even if there is anywhere from a slight to a medium difference between teams. bias. not rule. the media will always have a bias when reporting for that which will get them the most hits/viewers whatever. socio-economics and capitalism. I am an east coaster but I find it inane to argue that there isn't a bias. I think you just don't know what the word means.

A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.

A statistical sampling or testing error caused by systematically favoring some outcomes over others.
teacupwoozy
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 271
Joined: 2 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Free Bagel » Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:31 am

I am certainly aware of the definition of bias, and my last post was made up almost entirely of counterpoints to your arguments to if anything led us offbase it was the points I was replying to ;).

The fact of the matter is that the media will go where the story is and anytime it's someone other than a west coasters favorite team in the news they whine about how they're being persecuted.

The specific matter brought up was the "east coast bias" that excluded Seattle last year in favor of the Patriots, Colts, and TO. To which my counterpoint is that to say location had anything to do with those situations is asinine. You're looking at two of the leagues most marketable players and one that is the most dramatic (who got the same attention when he was over on the poor neglected west coast) all together with the 3 time defending Super Bowl champs and high-powered offense that almost went undefeated this season. You mention that bias will lend the media to lean towards the east coast team when situations are equal or similar, which in the point brought up they certainly were not, and there were plenty of east coast and big revenue teams left out as well including the Super Bowl Champs (who really only got any mention when Bettis mentioned he'd be retiring AND they beat the Colts). These people just want to believe their team is God's gift to football and anytime Sportscenter isn't telling them the same thing it's just because everyone is out to get them.
Image
Free Bagel
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertMock(ing) DrafterCafe Musketeer
Posts: 8495
Joined: 25 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Titletown, FL

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 0:50 hours
(and 35 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact