The 44 Day Tail That Wags The 4 Year Dog

For months now, the New Zealand media has bemoaned the World Cup failure in Cardiff. The All Blacks' quarterfinal exit was a shock to the nation. McCaw & Co., just a few months ago, were destined to finally end the drought and bring William Webb Ellis back home. Now all is lost.
As an American, I cannot fully understand the obsession with the World Cup. The only sport that we are as infatuated with, as the Kiwis are with rugby, is American football. Whatever one might say about baseball as the "national pastime," the NFL is the league that gets all the dollars, fans, and viewers. No significant international competition exists for football, and if it did, the Americans would wipe the floor with the opposition. Besides, American passion for international sport is low. Our victories do not mean as much, because we have several hundred million citizens, the best facilities, and the most corporate bucks to help our teams succeed. On that level, I cannot understand the typical All Black fan's angst.
I still think that the Kiwis are going overboard. They put too much stock in the World Cup, given the distortion that occurs with quadrennial competition. A quick comparison with the NFL, shows the problems.
How fair is it to compare rugby and American football? They are interestingly similar. The physicality and attrition rate is significant. (American football seems to be worse on the body. The average NFL career is only 3.5 seasons according the NFL Players Association website.) Both are games that require good coaching and team cohesion. In football and rugby, individuals must fit inside the team and the coach's system. Both sports have a high risk of injury and a high need for coordination and practice. A team takes years to hit on all cylinders. Thus, the need for cohesion is high, as is player turnover rates.
To show the similarities in turnover rates, take a look at New Zealand and the New England Patriots. The All Blacks team that lost in Cardiff had 10 of 22 players in the lineup who were there four years ago to lose in Sydney. If the Pats make the Super Bowl this year, they will start 7 of the 22 who played in Super Bowl XXXVIII against Carolina. The rate of change is similar.
Being so similar, what would it look like if the NFL went to a championship every four years? (The comparison is silly and only good for a hypothetical discussion. Each year the NFL rakes in billions with its season and Super Bowl, and would never go to a different schedule. Rugby could never hold a World Cup every year. The expenses would be huge. Adding up the population of all 10 major rugby nations (Six Nations, Tri Nations, and Argentina), one gets about 290 million people. Italy and Argentina provide a sizable chunk of that number and few of their citizens watch rugby. Those 290 million people support 10 test sides and 60 club/super teams. The United States supports only 32 NFL teams and has a population over 300 million and many more advertising dollars. Travel distances in international rugby can be up to 11,500 miles (Auckland to Paris or London) whereas the biggest NFL plane ride is Seattle to Miami, ca. 2,700 miles (less than a quarter the distance). A yearly World Cup would be too expensive, and demand too much from fans financially. For better or worse, a world champion can only be crowned every four years.)
In a few weeks, the 42nd Super Bowl will take place. Adding up the Super Bowl champions, the picture currently looks like this:
5 Super Bowls-Dallas Cowboys, Pittsburgh Steelers, and San Francisco 49ers.
3 Super Bowls-Green Bay Packers, New England Patriots, Oakland/Los Angeles Raiders, and Washington Redskins.
2 Super Bowls-Denver Broncos, Indianapolis/Baltimore Colts, Miami Dolphins, and New York Giants.
1 Super Bowl-Baltimore Ravens, Chicago Bears, Kansas City Chiefs, New York Jets, St. Louis Rams, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
If, however, the NFL were to only hold a Super Bowl every fours years, with Super Bowl I the first, and then Super Bowl V the second, and so on, the results change drastically.
2 Super Bowls-Baltimore/Indianapolis Colts, New York Giants, and Pittsburgh Steelers.
1 Super Bowl-Denver Broncos, Green Bay Packers, San Francisco 49ers, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and Washington Redskins.
The difference is significant. The great Dallas Cowboys of both the 70s and 90s are left out all together. Pittsburgh gets two of its titles, but if the cycle were adjusted by a year or two, they too would get none. Joe Montana wins no rings, but Steve Young gets one with the 49ers. The recent Patriot dynasty disappears and even a win in this year's Super Bowl would do them no good. Green Bay and Washington only get one victory and classic NFL teams like Al Davis' Raiders and Don Shula's Dolphins get nothing. Conversely, some mediocre teams rise in prominence. The New York Giants get to keep both of their championships, as do the Colts. Perennial contenders like the Skins, Niners, and Broncos get as much attention as the one and done Bucs. Think about players and coaches. Peyton Manning is no longer the choker who finally got it done. Brady, Staubach, Favre, Walsh, Montana, Namath, Landry, Allen, Ditka, and on and on all are left with no championships. The greatest Super Bowl QB of all time would be Phil Simms.
The history of the NFL would be vastly different. All of the great dynasties are lessened, and several less important teams look dominant. The very same thing is happening in rugby. If the World Cup happened every year over the last twenty the All Blacks would certainly have at least ten in their trophy cabinet. The successes of South Africa and Australia would be occasional. Just look at the Tri Nations victors over the years. If one took the combined 240 months that have occurred during the World Cup Era, it is unlikely that the All Blacks were not the best team for more than 40 of them.
The four-year cycle distorts history. It amplifies one short period with little reference to other years. The All Blacks are not in a drought. Just ask the Red Sox and White Sox what a real drought is (more than 80 years with annual championships). Rugby is a game that can be greatly affected by injuries, refereeing, and weather conditions. Bookies make money because the best time often loses. When something as important as world championships are decided in the period of 44 days, statistical irregularities are due to happen. That is all the All Blacks' failures are: statistical oddities. Is some choking going on? Sure. Do the players need to just play instead being buried by the weight of the situation? Yes.
This is not likely to happen, however, as long as the fans and media continue to look past repeated success year in and year out and only look myopically on three percent of history (44 days out of four years). The Grand Slams, Lion sweeps, Super Titles, Tri Nations victories, and Bledisloe Cup conquests are significant. They show a New Zealand rugby union that is stronger than any other in the world. Just look at the Irish salivating over a guy like Rua Tipoki, who never made a dent with the All Blacks. He might be the best player of the entire Heineken Cup. If one looks at the grand scale things in New Zealand are going well. The only blight on the record is that little trophy that has put the whole world on its ear.