Oh, absolutely, but in life, unlike in football, there are degrees of winning and losing, and in most life situations that do not involve direct one-on-one competition for a job or a life partner, no one HAS to lose in order for someone else to win. It doesn't need to be either/or.
The idea behind NCLB was to try to give every kid in the country the opportunity to live up to his own intellectual potential by forcing schools to look critically at outcomes. Obviously, in practice it has completely failed to do that because of the overly simplistic way that it is implemented, but there is a tiny kernel of sense there: I don't at all expect equality of outcomes, but there *is* value in setting goals and trying to reach them.
I think it is ridiculous in an education context to try to impose a one-size fits all methodology, and to penalize teachers for failing to reach the set goals for student perfomance, but I don't think it's all that far out there to penalize them to failing to try. (And believe me, I've seen administrators and teachers that have completely given up on trying. It doesn't make them bad people, but IMO, it does mean that those in that position need to look at finding another line of work.)
If that were REALLY what NCLB was doing it would be FANTASTIC, but it is NOT. NCLB expects every child to get to the same level of proficiency and that is just impossible. Some people are just smarter than others, some kids have various conditions that prevent this from happening, etc. They expect the severely disabled student that can't even feed himself and the class valedictorian to have the same progress. THAT is what is wrong with NCLB.
NCLB doesn't measure individual student progress, it measures how one class did compared to the class before them. They don't track kids from kindergarten through 12th grade to see what individual progress is made, not even close.