.
VR
lordvampirio's Journal


lordvampirio's Journal

THIS JOURNAL IS ON 68 FAVORITE JOURNAL LISTS

Honor: 0    [ Give / Take ]

PROFILE




1 entry this month
 

19:31 Sep 21 2007
Times Read: 648


I was reading Dominic Bonvissuto’s Article “NFL Game Rankings, Week 3” in Sports Illustrated today when I came across the following passage:



3. Indianapolis (2-0) at Houston (2-0) 1 p.m.

This battle for the early lead in the AFC South lost some of its luster with Andre Johnson out for Sunday. The Colts did look beatable last week, though, and the Texans basically built their defense around stopping Peyton Manning. And let's not forget the Texans are the last team to beat the world champion Colts.




So I felt the urge to respond:



How can you call the Indianapolis Colts World Champions when all they have won is a national competition?

Don't you have to compete against teams from other countries to earn the title World Champion? Like the Soccer World Cup where 32 teams from 32 different countries compete for the title World Champion?

Or have I missed something and the USA are the world? If so, you would be surprised that there are quite a few countries north, south, across the atlantic and across the pacific of the USA!




A random response I got from another reader was:



I like how somebody always has to complain about the "World Champion" moniker. The NFL is trying (though perhaps half-heartedly) to expand internationally, but the international fanbase would rather spend their money to see soccer, basketball, or baseball than American football. You could make the argument that its the NFL's fault for the folding of NFL 'Europa', but the fact that they can't turn a profit with it speaks to something. The way I see it, right now, there's not an international team to even compete for a championship in American football, and while that may change at some point in the future, there should probably be at least one team worth playing before we go crying about the semantics of a "World Champion"



I felt that he missed my point, so I wrote:



My point being, you can only be considered World Champion if you win an international/global competition as such. By winning a national title you are nothing more but a National Champion, regardless whether it's the strongest league in the world or not.

I mean, who is the reigning World Champion in basketball? The San Antonio Spurs because they won the NBA Finals or Spain because they won the Official World Championship.

The USA won the IAFA World Championship 2007 in Japan against international competition. That means the USA is official World Champion in American Football, but not the Indianapolis Colts who only won a domestic competition.




Now I got a response from the author of the article, Mr Dominic Bonvissuto himself:



The Unamerican (= the name I was using) -- You are the world's best commenter. (And you've convinced me to choose my words a little more carefully.)



Finally someone who listened to me and got my point. He made my day :)



I also found this in my inbox just now:



I like when people take the time to present their side of the argument in a clear and concise manner, without resorting to yelling or name-calling. You're welcome to comment on my blog anytime.



Seems like a nice chap to me :)





COMMENTS

-






COMPANY
REQUEST HELP
CONTACT US
SITEMAP
REPORT A BUG
UPDATES
LEGAL
TERMS OF SERVICE
PRIVACY POLICY
DMCA POLICY
REAL VAMPIRES LOVE VAMPIRE RAVE
© 2004 - 2022 Vampire Rave
All Rights Reserved.
Vampire Rave is a member of 
Page generated in 0.0814 seconds.
X
Username:

Password:
I agree to Vampire Rave's Privacy Policy.
I agree to Vampire Rave's Terms of Service.
I agree to Vampire Rave's DMCA Policy.
I agree to Vampire Rave's use of Cookies.
•  SIGN UP •  GET PASSWORD •  GET USERNAME  •
X