Just in time for the Super Bowl, I've crunched the numbers and put in the man-hours to find out which National Football League team is the best based off of how well their namesake would do in a fight. If you missed it, I did this for the MLB too, and as with the results of my MLB study, these results are incontrovertible.
Methodology
•We're doing the same methodology as last time. Real life conferences and playoff schedule, but instead of two teams trying to get touchdowns, it's two warriors trying to kill the crap out of each other.
•One combatant per team. A lone Patriot versus a single Dolphin for instance.
•Namesakes will be ranked on a scale of 1-5 on their offense, defense, athleticism, and intelligence along with any miscellaneous skills or abilities. I'll give my brief overall assessment as well.
•There are no mascots, fan names, and really no correlation to the actual sport of football whatsoever. I don't really follow football all that much, so you can rest assured that these results are not biased and are in fact 100% true.
•I cannot be wrong.
•That being said, I have a feeling that football fans are going to be way more angry and upset by some of these results than the baseball fans were. Take a pre-emptive chill pill, guys.
Here we go!
What did we learn?
•Again, not much.
•On the whole, NFL namesakes are much tougher and stronger than the things MLB teams are named after. Unlike in baseball, there wasn't any correlation between namesake toughness and matching reality. Seriously, the 49ers and the Ravens are weak.
•The Giant is always a safe bet.
•If you disagree with any of my conclusions or methods, you're an idiot. These results are bulletproof, in that you can't kill an idea.
•There is no way in hell I'm going to do this with Major League Soccer. This is America, and it would get me three, maybe four page views. Also – team names like Galaxy, Impact and Real Salt Lake? How do make Sportling fight Revolution? F*%# you, soccer.
Share This Article
