A Comment about Points after Touchdowns

I've been watching a lot of college football today (go Penn State!), and I've been watching football in general all my life. I just have to lay out a comment about PATs-- points after touchdowns. Is there any good reason for having them?

Let's face facts here... at least 95 out of 100 extra points will be made in the college and pro level. It's basically a slam dunk, other than the rare blocked or flubbed kick. So, what's the point of having extra point kicks at all if they're basically guaranteed points? Shouldn't you have to earn your points in a game where, for the rest of the game, every yard is a battle? Extra points are a boring way to score, and arguably the easiest way to get a point in any kind of game anywhere, other than a breakway slam dunk in basketball.

Now as you well know, in both the college and pro level, a team can opt to go for the two point conversion, which is a pass or run from the 2 yard line, but it's rarely ever attempted unless a specific situation calls for it. I personally like the two-point play because the whole offense and whole defense are involved in the play and you really have to strategize and fight your way to score.

My opinion would be to go with one of the following two options in order to boost the game of football:

1. Eliminate extra point attempts altogether in favor of a mandatory two-point play after a touchdown,

or,

2. Instead of the 2-point play, make it worth 3 points per score, as a greater incentive to scrap the kick and go for the bonus points after a touchdown.

That's my 2 points, err, cents, on how to make the great game of football even more intriguing.

Outdoor Hockey: Fun but Fan-Friendly?

I love the concept of the NHL hosting outdoor hockey games. It's sports the way sports were played as kids. The elements play a role in the game, not to mention that any cold weather city never gets to have a Super Bowl, so at least this is some consolation.

Today the Chicago Blackhawks are hosting the Detroit Red Wings at Wrigley Field. It's blustery and a bit snowy there today, making for perfect hockey conditions and a fun atmosphere.

I just wonder how fan-friendly it is to watch in person.

As a comparison, when attending an Eagles game, one can watch the game as it progresses on the field, or if, say, you are sitting really low behind one end zone but all the action is happening at the opposite end zone, you can watch the humongous scoreboard as the play unfolds. Otherwise, it's very difficult to see.

In today's "Winter Classic," (as it's being billed... though I'm not sure an annual game that's three years into the making can truly be considered a "classic," but I digress), the hockey rink is set up over the infield of Wrigley, and the fans are seated in the regular baseball seats. And there's no jumbotron scoreboard to get an up close view. So I must ask... can a fan on the second level or in the outfield really see much of anything? The puck is so small to begin with that it must be an eyestrain just to tell what's going on.

Last year I was very excited about the rumors of the Pittsburgh Penguins and Philadelphia Flyers playing a game in Penn State's Beaver Stadium. It sounds like a tremendous idea, with the possibility of 100,000+ fans coming out to a mid-state battleground. But would it be too much like watching ants chasing arond a pebble from 50 rows up in the stands? Perhaps it doesn't even matter and fans would just go to enjoy the cold weather...

College Recruiting and the Head Coach Issue... Total Insanity

I read an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer today about a press conference that Penn State football coach Joe Paterno held yesterday. In the article, Paterno talked about how people always ask him how long he'll be coaching Penn State. I assume this is meant to reflect some sort of future stability at Penn State, or lack thereof, when a recruit decides what school to attend. To that I say... this question is totally insane.

In principle, this question is actually not totally insane. Sure, if I'm a budding star football player, I'd most certainly like to know which coach I'm going to be playing for. It would give me a sense of what to expect, and allow me to find the coach that best suits my preference.

But in reality, this question is totally insane. Coaches switch jobs, get fired, retire, or become lame ducks left and right. Just think about these names in recent years and consider how stable the college coaching profession really is (click on the links to see coaching changes from the past year in each respective sport):

College Basketball Coaches
-Billy Donovan
-Fran Dunphy
-Roy Williams
-Bobby Knight
-Kelvin Sampson

College Football Coaches
-Rich Rodriguez
-June Jones
-Dennis Franchione
-Bobby Petrino
-Chan Gailey

Those are some big names that have changed places, in both sports. So what it comes down to is the overall program. Coaching changes occur on practically a weekly basis, across the country. That's the reality of college sports now. What recruits really should be looking at is the overall program. Is it strong? Is it up and coming? Is it going downhill? Worrying about what coach is going to be there next year, or next week for that matter, is pretty futile. Kind of like timing the stock market-- will it be up this month? Down this month? Or over the next four years will it be pretty good overall? Long term is always the best way to go.

So yes, Coach Paterno is nearing the end of his career, unless he finds the fountain of youth (maybe he already has?), but I think every athlete in America knows what he's getting with Penn State football. As the saying goes, "It is what it is." In fact, in today's game, college sports are more about the overall brand than they are about the coach. But some people haven't caught on to this fact of life.

While some people are busy trying to follow the dizzying coaching carousel, I think athletes are much better off trying to figure out how they'll fit in the whole program-- how they mesh with the entire coaching staff, the entire team, and the entire university. That's the most sane way to look at it all...

Flyers, Penguins and 107,000 Puckheads

Yesterday, local (Philly-area) media reported that the Philadelphia Flyers and Pittsburgh Penguins are dabbling with the notion of playing a regular season game at Penn State University in Happy Valley in January of 2009. Outdoors. In Beaver Stadium.

Let me just say that this would be the wildest game I could possibly imagine.

Not only is the Flyers/Pens rivalry building steam especially after last week's scrappy 8-2 battle that the Flyers won, but having it at a neutral location that State College provides, and having it at the country's second largest stadium in the dead of winter just sounds like the a recipe for mayhem. Up to 107,000 fans cheering on a bitter rivalry would be crazy. But in a good way.

Having gone to Penn State I realize that roughly 1/3 of the students are Philly sports fans, 1/3 are Pittsburgh sports fans, and the rest are "miscellaneous"... mostly New York sports fans and a mix of others. So the built-in battleground between the two Pennsylvania cities is already there, and the party scene would be well-represented on both sides.

My only real question is... if you're sitting at the top row of Beaver Stadium in a full house... how in the H-E-double-hockey-sticks would you be able to see the puck???

Other than that, I say... play on!

WE ARE... ONE G?

According to Penn State's student newspaper, The Collegian, season football tickets for students sold out in a mere 59 minutes earlier this year; and subsequently to buy a ticket online to see Penn State battle with Notre Dame could run you about $1,100.

Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE to be at any Penn State game this year (or any year for that matter), particularly to see the Fighting Irish, but I'll happily enjoy the game from the comfort and low-cost couch at home.

Go Lions!

JoePa Terno Doesthe RightThing

Penn State football coach Joe Paterno did the right thing last week by insisting that his entire team clean the 107,000+ seat Beaver Stadium after every home game after being disgusted by a disgraceful off-campus fight involving a half-dozen of his players. In sum, he was disappointed not only that the players got into a scuffle to begin with, but also because nobody stepped up to try to stop it or to claim responsibility. It's a throw-back, old school move that could affect his recruiting in the near future (if I'm a talented but trouble-making young football player, would I want to go to PSU to play football?), but sometimes the right decision is not always the most popular one. His argument is that by cleaning the stadium the players will learn from their mistakes and step up as a team. I agree 132%.

But what's more, I'd really like to see some ex-PSU players who attend a home game voluntarily help out and clean as well. Can you imagine what solidarity and character this would build? If I was playing for the Nittany Lions this year and I saw an ex-player help clean trash with the rest of the current team, I would have tremendous respect and pride for this alum, as well as for Coach Paterno who arranged this program. There are hundreds of ex-players out there... let's see if anybody steps up to the plate.

On a separate but related note, I firmly believe that NFL football teams should be held to this policy is well. You get busted at a strip joint for firing gunshots? Pick up a broom.