Parity: Plague or Promise?

John Hoh
Monday July 7, 2008

The Grand Rapids Rampage (6-10, regular season; now 8-10 overall) defeated the Chicago Rush (11-5 regular season; now 11-6 overall) in Arena Football League second round playoff action.

For the third straight season a sub-.500 team is playing in a Conference Championship game. The previous two went on to play in the ArenaBowl with on team winning the championship despite a losing regular season record.

For the third time a 6 seed defeated a 1 seed. Take into consideration that New York came oh-so-close to beating the Soul and two 6 seeds would have taken out 1 seeds to gain entrance to a conference championship berth.

Ah, parity. Isn't this what Pete Rozelle of the older league based in the United States envisioned when he touted parity? That old canard that on any given Sunday any team can beat any other team?

Or are these upsets the result of too many teams gaining entrance to the Arena playoffs? There are 17 teams in the league. 12 teams make the playoffs. That means over 50% (actually 71%) make the playoffs, win, lose, or draw in the regular season. Three-fourths of all teams make the playoffs. It kind of makes you long for the old days of the National Hockey League.

What will further complicate matters is that unlike the old days, the 12 playoff teams are not the 12 teams with the best records in the entire league. But each conference has six teams play in a conference playoff format to send two representatives to the ArenaBowl. That meant 6-10 Grand Rapids, Colorado, and Utah secured playoff berths with playoff money while 8-8 Tampa Bay and New Orleans stayed home.

The promise is that almost no team was ever out of the playoff race. Well, that's to be expected when only five teams are peeled away. Columbus was the only team never in serious playoff consideration. Utah started the season with nine—count 'em, NINE—loses. Yet they made the playoffs. 

It's not only the Arena Football League where this happens. Major League Baseball created the Wild Card when teams were distributed into three divisions in the two leagues. The Florida Marlins have never won a division championship. They won two World Series titles courtesy of the Wild Card slot. The Giants and Angels played each other in the World Series, both as Wild Cards.

Last year the New York Giants, a six seed Wild Card, knocked off the previously unbeaten Patriots. Several years ago Pittsburgh's Steelers as a sixth seed beat a one seed in the Seattle Seahawks. Ironically, Pittsburgh was favored to win that game!

We won't go into NBA basketball and NHL hockey. Their playoff formats have always been a free-for-all.

It's no longer enough to be consistent for a season. A team needs to be hot. Preferably at playoff time. Dallas started out 7-0 and 9-1. But they couldn't win their division and the bye that goes with that. They also promptly lost in the first round to New York's Dragons, who were seeking to replicate the Giants feat. Grand Rapids came to Chicago as an underdog. Yet Chicago came into the game losing three of five (and barely gaining the 1 seed). Grand Rapids was on a roll. The Rampage had won four in a row, including a playoff game against the Arizona Rattlers, the only Wild Card team with a winning record in the American Conference.

Yes, this parity could be seen as a plague. Will it devalue the league if losing teams not only “earn” playoff berths, but then succeed? Or do these playoff races and the playoff drama help the league win fans?

Personally, I am not a fan of having more than 50% of a league's teams in the playoffs. For this year's season, that would mean eight teams in the playoffs. What value is there in a regular season when almost 75% of the league's teams make the playoffs? I believe there needs to be a reward for total effort throughout the season. This does not mean a team with a losing record won't sneak in. Under the four teams per conference set-up, one 6-10 team from the American Conference would have gained a berth (ironically, Utah in this case, even though the Blaze started out 0-9).

Playoffs and playoff formats always have their controversies. Even though the league has divisions and conferences, these designations meant nothing more than being convenient scheduling tools. Each team's schedule had two games with each team residing in their division. For playoff purposes the early years of the league slotted match-ups by record, and teams were reseeded each round so that the lowest seed always played the highest seed, etc. Even a division crown did not guarantee a playoff berth. Ask the New York Dragons of 2004, winners of the National Conference Eastern Division crown. They lost the tie-breaker to the third place Tampa Bay Storm.

The Dragons record that year? 9-7.