SuperLink: Stupid Football Arguments

For this job, I do a lot more reading than I do writing. That might be tough to believe when you consider that I publish 45-50 articles per month, but it’s true. For every hour I spend researching or typing away on an article, I spend at least 2 reading other people’s work in an effort to continuing learning the game, stay current on the happening around the NFL, and to make sure that opinions are as informed as possible.

Occasionally I run across an article that says exactly what I’d been thinking about for a while, but could never find the right words to express those thoughts. Its in these times that I tend to write a post like this instead of just linking to the article on the Hub. I want to make sure that all of you who read this site get a chance to see the article, and that it doesn’t get missed.

I’m referring to an article on BuffaLowDown, that I noticed when working with the site’s editor on my 2012 Buffalo Bills preview published earlier this morning.

Stupid Football Arguments: The Best College Team Vs. The Worst NFL Team

"Not only could Alabama NOT have beaten the Colts, the Colts would win by 50+ points. Easily. The Colts would have been stronger at every single position except running back (Trent Richardson is awesome). NFL players – even ones on crappy teams – are MEN."

This is always the dumbest thing I have read ever year. I hate this argument, and clearly so does Brad Andrews, the editor of that site. He’s exactly right.

Every single one of the players in the NFL, even all of the ones on really bad teams like the 2011 Colts, were all great college players. Conversely, less than half the players on the Alabama squad will ever play in the NFL, at all, even as backups. Hey, a bunch of them wont even make it as backups in a minor league like the CFL, and they’re supposed to be able to beat real NFL players? Not going to happen.

Hopefully we can put this to rest, and never have to deal with it ever again.