>In the world of sports every athlete engages in competition in the hopes that they will eventually be considered the best in their respective endeavor. Whether it be team or individual sports most athletes aim to be the best. The idea of creating parity in sports is seen as a necessity in some sporting environments, and completely neglected in others.
North American sporting culture, particularly team sports, seem to be consumed with making the teams in their respective leagues as balanced as possible. All of the four major North American leagues (NHL -I’m Canadian I have to include them-, NBA, NFL and NBA) utilize a player draft system which rewards those teams that preformed the worst with the best young talent. Leagues have also introduced salary caps, revenue sharing and other measures aimed at creating an environment whereby it is possible for any team to win.
How successful have these measures been in generating parity? It is difficult to determine. A look at the champions of each league since 1980 reveals that the NBA has had the fewest number of different champions (8), while baseball have had the most with 19. The NHL and NFL lie somewhere in the the middle 13 and 14 respectively (Thanks wikipedia!). I think the lack of parity in the NBA is related to the limited size of each teams roster. Teams are able to remain at the top without having to change as many parts as is required in other leagues. With the exception of basketball there have been few so called dynasties in modern day sports. I have heard about the Oilers, Islanders of the early 80s in hockey or the Yankees of the 1940s and 50s in baseball. However, when I think of modern day dynasties in those sports it becomes more difficult. The evidence would suggest that parity in sports will continue to grow.
The trend towards parity seems inevitable in all sports, but is it a good thing? Is diversity better for sports? I don’t think so and I will make my case in Part II.
Advertisement
