Mobile
Open For Debate
Saturday, February 1, 2014
NFL / Open For Debate Open for debate: Should the Super Bowl move to Saturday?
Posted By Jeff Hahne on Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 4:38 PM
Nothing kills a buzz faster than the phrase, "I have to work tomorrow." However, even if you don't drink, there are plenty of reasons to move the big game, aka Super Bowl, to Saturday.
- Ease of travel. My brother in South Carolina has a Super Bowl get-together every year. I went once. Traveling home two hours after the game wasn't my idea of fun; and most of the time I was watching the game, I could only think, "I have to drive home as soon as this ends." Thankfully, there was no overtime.
- Ease of cleanup. If you have a Super Bowl party on Saturday, you can go to sleep, wake up the next day and clean. If it's on Sunday, you have to get it all done before you go to bed since you, likely, have to work the next day. No one wants to come home on a Monday evening to a bowl of stale chips and dried-out dip.
- College football is over. So, that eliminates the regular season excuse of competition between the sports.
- Kids can stay up and watch the game instead of heading to bed at halftime because they have school the next day.
- It's not like it's somebody's birthday. It's a football game.
- Super Bowl Saturday has a similar ring to Super Bowl Sunday.
ESPN writer Kenny Mayne has started a movement to "Move the Big Game" -
What do you think? Does anyone actually prefer it on Sunday?
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Open For Debate Open for debate: Should the NFL eliminate extra points?
Posted By Jeff Hahne on Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:32 PM
Ah, the wonderful point-after touchdown - football's "gimme" bonus after a team scores six. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said the league is examining the future of the PAT, noting that only five were missed out of roughly 1,200 attempts this season.
One proposal is that a touchdown would equal an automatic seven points. If a team goes for an eighth point - by running or passing the ball - it's a win/lose situation. Make the play and you get the eighth point. Miss it, and you drop to six points. How many teams would be willing to take the gamble?
My suggestion: move the extra point back to, say, a 30-yard attempt. That way, it's no longer a given for any team or kicker.
What do you think? Leave it like it is, or should it be modified?
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Open For Debate Open for debate: Are athletes and coaches paid too much?
Posted By Jeff Hahne on Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:52 PM
I'd like to open up the following for debate - Athletes and coaches are paid too much money.
It's being reported that Nick Saban's contract will pay him roughly $7 million per year until 2020. That same article says Bill Belichick makes $7.5 million a year. Athletes can make more than $10 million per year, plus endorsements.
Have you ever noticed that sports, along with Hollywood, never takes a hit when the economy is in a recession or downturn? Most of us don't get an annual raise, yet someone like Saban gets a roughly $2 million raise in just over a year? In 2007, he was being paid $4 million .... to coach a football team. In six years, he's nearly doubled his pay.
Look, I love sports as much as the next guy - well, unless that guy is painting his face and wearing a jersey to the game - but since I've lived in Charlotte (for the last eight years), I've been to one Panthers game. Why? I can't afford the tickets. A decent seat goes for roughly $70 - and you'll likely be sitting two rows from God. Alabama's average ticket price this season was $178 - and those athletes don't even get paid! (I'm only using Alabama as a recent example because of Saban's raise, not because Auburn beat them in the Iron Bowl... War Eagle!)
If salaries weren't so high, ticket prices wouldn't be so high. But yet as salaries go up, so does the cost to put your ass in the seat. Clearly it's not a problem for everyone because the Panthers' stadium is packed on a weekly basis.
How did these numbers get to be so out of control? Some people say it's because the average "shelf-life" for an athlete is short, but I'd argue that if they got a college degree and didn't bail out early, they'd have a career to fall back on.
Are athletes and coaches really worth $7 million, $10 million or more per year?
Friday, November 15, 2013
NFL / College Football / Open For Debate Open to debate: Should grown men wear jerseys?
Posted By Jeff Hahne on Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:30 PM
Open to debate: Should grown men and women wear football jerseys?
One school of thought says, "Hell yes! Support your team!" The other school of thought is, "Hell no! You're a grown-ass man wearing someone else's name on your shirt while you're at the grocery store. Have some self respect!"
Regardless of your stance, I think we can all agree on a few simple rules:
Friday, October 18, 2013
College Football / Open For Debate Open to debate: The college football season so far
Posted By Jeff Hahne on Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:43 PM
It's probably because football is my favorite sport, but I can't believe we're halfway through the college football season and nearly to the halfway point in the NFL. Where does the time go? Anyway, here are some thoughts on the college season so far:
- First off, let me just say that the pink helmets Oregon will be playing in this weekend have taken Breast Cancer Awareness Month a bit too far. Not too far for the cause, but too far for the Ducks. How many different uniform options does this team have right now? (At last check, it was around 384.) It's a good thing that Oregon is winning; otherwise, the entire idea of mirrored helmets and neon uniforms might be a total distraction. Open to debate: What's your thought on the recent rash of uniform varieties - combat, pride, etc. - good for the sport or trashing tradition?
- I'm tired of Alabama. (Disclaimer: I went to college at Auburn and will yell "War Eagle!" till the day I die.) Hasn't everyone but Bama fans had enough of them? How many weeks of beating up on cupcake opponents can we watch? The same goes for Oregon and Ohio State - if only they had won a title or two in the past few years. I guess teams with tougher schedules don't come out unscathed. Still, I'd rather see the winner of Saturday's Clemson-Florida State game be voted as the No. 1 team in the country, especially if one of them serves up an old-fashioned beatdown. Open to debate: If both teams were to win out, would a one-loss Texas A&M team, who will face five top-25 teams this season, be more deserving of the SEC Championship game than an undefeated Alabama team who only faces two? (Remember the A&M loss to Bama came early in the season.)
- Speaking of which, I hold firm in my opinion that no team should get any ranking before mid-October - that way we truly know how teams are playing. Teams that aren't predicted to do well don't have to climb all the way to the top if they stay undefeated, and teams that are tanking shouldn't be in the rankings in the first place. No matter how poorly a team plays, those at the top rarely change rankings without a loss. Open to debate: Should Georgia (AP No. 15) and its two losses (and eeked-out overtime win to Tennessee) be ranked above three undefeated teams and four schools with one loss? If the polls were released this week for the first time, do you think they'd even be in the top 25, especially knowing how many injuries they're plagued with?
- At least one team in the top 5 is going to lose this weekend (Clemson or Florida State). After that, there aren't many challenges ahead for those leading the pack. Who else wishes the playoffs started this season instead of next? Open to debate: Will the SEC/Alabama win again, or will someone finally dethrone those pesky elephants?
