CommenTerry

When to Go for Two

Generally, a college or pro football coach should only go for the two-point conversion in the second half of a game. Even in the second half, going for two points too early could lead to a cycle of lost extra points and desperation to go for two every time. In addition, the two-point conversion should only be attempted if two points provide a benefit that one point doesn't.

For example, after a team scores a touchdown to bring them up to a 24-19 deficit, it would make sense for them to go for two to get within a field goal. However if the touchdown made the score 24-18, two points would not get them any added benefit over kicking an extra point, as being down by four is just as bad a being down by five. In both cases, a touchdown or two field goals would be required to take the lead.

New Rule Not Needed

Last fall, someone who has just recently become a football fan asked me an interesting question: can both tackles be eligible to catch a pass on the same play? This question came after a team invoked the "tackle eligible" rule. Of course, the short answer to this question is "no."

While I know of no rule that explicitly forbids both tackles from being eligible, it is overcome by another rule: the requirement that the offense have seven men on the line of scrimmage. Having both tackles eligible would mean they would both have to be uncovered (no one on the line between them and the sideline), which, by definition, would mean there would only be five men on the line.

Cool It on the Bean Ball, Okay?

I've never understood why Major League Baseball pitchers are always pressured by their teammates to retaliate when the opposing pitcher hits one of their batters with a pitch. I'm sure this is not intentional most of time. Yet, teams almost always treat it as if it were, many times leading to a benches-clearing brawl and ejections. Will this nonsense ever stop?

Repeat After Me: There's No Snowing in Baseball

I have a difficult time being interested in any sport out of season. For example, my brain can only process football from September to January, basketball from November to April, and baseball from April to October. That means no NFL draft, NBA playoffs, or "hot stove" league for me. Perhaps that's why I'm having such a hard time maintaining my interest in the Super Bowl, now that they're playing it in February (a strictly basketball month for me). By the way, since when did the NFL draft become a spectator sport?

The NFL Needs to Remove its Leeches

More than any other sport, professional football has become way too commercialized and over-hyped. I never bother to watch pre-game or halftime shows anymore. The NFL doesn't need all the marginal celebrities and junk entertainment that have recently leeched onto it. That stuff is a net negative and the game doesn't need it.

The Trade Deadline That Isn't

The no-waivers trading deadline in Major League Baseball isn't logical. When I was growing up, it was June 15. It is now July 31. Even after that point, teams are able to have players clear waivers and then trade them anyway during the remainder of the season. It just isn't right that teams can pick up players (mercenaries?) for their pennant drive in August and September from teams that are out of contention.

This kind of activity reminds me of softball tournaments in which teams moving on in the tournament raid the rosters of teams that have been eliminated. There should be a hard and fast trade deadline (waivers or not) coinciding with the beginning of the season.

Could Football Learn from Hockey?

There needs to be a better a way of breaking ties in division and conference standings in the NFL. I suggest a point system be used as the first tie-breaker. Three points would be awarded for every game. If one team wins in regulation time, that team would receive all three points for that game. If one team wins in overtime, the winner would get two points and the loser would get one.

If the game ended in a tie, each team would get one and a half points. Unlike the National Hockey League, these points would not be used to determine positions in the standings; they would only be used for tie-breakers when two or more teams are tied. If this does resolve the tie, the old tie-breakers would be used in their current order.

The NFL's Overtime Rules Need to be Changed

The NFL's sudden death rules for overtime need to be changed. It's just not fair that a team can win a coin flip and then score on the first possession of overtime to win the game without the other team getting the ball. Teams need to play offense and defense and overtime should be no exception. In order for a team getting the ball first to get a sudden death victory, they should be required to take a lead of least nine points. This prevents them from winning on a single possession and would allow each team to get the ball at least once.

The other team could get a sudden death victory by taking any kind of lead. Barring a sudden death victory, whichever team is ahead at the end of the 15-minute overtime period would win the game, regardless of the margin. If a regular season game is still tied at that point, it would end in a tie. Playoff games that are tied at that point would continue until one team scores.

A Great Sense of Personal Loss Back Then

When I was a kid, I would feel a great sense of personal loss whenever my favorite football, baseball, or basketball team lost a game. I can remember one time when I was 13; the Redskins lost a playoff game to the Rams a few days before Christmas. That ruined my whole Christmas and New Year Year's holiday season. I can also remember crying a few years earlier, when the Virginia Squires lost a playoff series to the Kentucky Colonels!

Some Notes on Makeup Games and Tiebreakers

As hard as it might be to believe, another baseball season is now upon us. Now might be a good time discuss some things that might affect several teams by the end of the season -- makeup games and tiebreakers.

As a general rule, Major League Baseball requires that any postponed games that have still not been made up and that might affect a team's post-season status be made up at the end of the season. Other postponed games still not made up by that point are simply cancelled. The exception to this rule would be games lost to due to a work stoppage. These games are generally cancelled with no attempt to make them up, no matter what effect they may have on a team's post-season status. There have been situations in the past when teams have actually missed out on the post-season due to games they didn't get to play during strike years.

A prime example would be in 1972, when there was a strike at the beginning of the season, which ultimately cost most teams about 10 to 12 games. The Detroit Tigers ultimately won the American League East over the Boston Red Sox by one-half game. Boston had one more game cancelled by the strike than Detroit did. Detroit played one more game than Boston that year and picked up one more win. That margin sent Detroit to the American League Championship Series and sent Boston home. Now, had that game been lost to some kind of weather condition (like a rain out), the Red Sox would have had the opportunity to make up that game, with a chance to tie the Tigers and force a one-game playoff, had they won it.

The tiebreaker rules changed with the advent of wildcard teams in 1994. When two teams finish tied for a division lead, they don't necessarily play a one-game regular season playoff anymore. It depends on the post-season status of both teams prior to any would-be playoff. If both teams have already clinched a post-season berth, then no playoff game is used. A formula, beginning with their regular season record against each other, is used to break the tie and declare one team the division champion and the other team the wildcard team.

On the other hand, if a team in another division has clinched the wildcard berth or if any team from another division is tied with them, a one-game regular season playoff game is used. The winner takes the division crown and moves on to the post-season. When two teams not sharing a division lead are tied for the wildcard berth, a one-game regular season playoff is always used to break the tie.

Please note that division ties (if any) are broken before wildcard ties. So, if there's a situation in which the same teams are tied for both division leads and wildcard berths, the division ties are broken first, using a one-game playoff. Then if there are still teams tied for wildcard berths, those ties are broken with a one-game playoff.

To illustrate this point, let's suppose that Cleveland, Oakland, and Seattle all finished tied with a regular season record of 95-67. They are all three tied for the wildcard berth, but Oakland and Seattle are also tied for the AL West division title. In this case, Cleveland would automatically get the wildcard berth and Oakland and Seattle would play a one-game regular season playoff game for the division title, with the winner moving on to the post-season and the loser, who would finish one-half game behind Cleveland for the wildcard berth, going home.

Now, let's take the above scenario and throw Minnesota into the mix, with the Twins tied with Cleveland for the AL Central division title and tied with all three of those teams for the wildcard berth. Cleveland and Minnesota would play for Central title; Oakland and Seattle would play for West title. The two losers would then play for the wildcard berth.

Three-way ties for a division lead or wildcard berth are obviously more complicated (and rare) and have therefore intentionally been omitted from this article.