Time-in
Baseball is a great game. Yes, as George Will has said, it’s only a game, but “the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona. Not all holes, or games, are created equal.”
One of the holes that Will considers unequal to baseball is obviously football, which in Will’s words “combines the two worst things about America: it is violence punctuated by committee meetings.”
George Will just isn’t a football type of guy, and that’s fine by me, because I’m not, either. It’s not the violence that rankles me — I can even sit and watch a boxing match on TV for a while. It’s the committee meetings part.
Football consists mainly of a bunch of grossly overweight guys standing around trying to catch their breath while waiting for the clock finally to restart so they can ply their trade for about six seconds, after which they’ll stand around for a while again. Look in on a game in which one of the teams uses a no-huddle offense and you’ll see all those huge millionaires on the defensive team sucking air after about a minute.
Anyway.
Those thoughts went through my mind the other day as I read about this clever idea for speeding football up a little and adding some really nteresting new strategic elements as well. Basically, one of the teams could call a “time-in” to get the clock going when it would otherwise be stopped, as it so often is. Nice. Fewer committee meetings. Never happen. But nice.
Comments
When George Will was a kid, if he got into a baseball game, it was for right field, usually as the last pick. This may account for his success as a pundit.
Posted by: Shag from Brookline | August 20, 2009 02:01 PM
Disapproving of football because there is too much of “guys standing around”, while simultaneously advocating for baseball, is the height of irony. Is there any sport that consists more of “guys standing around” (okay, okay golf) than baseball?
One of my pet peeves is reducing a sport to a one sentence simplification as a way of demonstrating it’s inferiority. It’s an embarrassing way of avoiding any deeper understanding of a sport and attempting to minimize a complex game: “Soccer is just people trying to kick a ball until someone overreacts and celebrates for too long”, “Basketball is just lobbing a ball at a metal ring and preening for the cameras when it does”
Posted by: Sam | August 20, 2009 02:58 PM
Shag: Good one.
Sam: If that’s one of your pet peeves, your life must be in extremely good shape. Anyway, I understand your point about irony but disagree about it. Baseball has no time clock. It’s timeless (or, if you ask my wife, who is no baseball fan, it’s infinite). As the linked article notes, a great deal of football strategy, by contrast, has to do with clock management, so the sight of all those fat guys just standing around, irrespective of whether time is in or out, runs counter to most other aspects of the game except (1) commercialism and (2) giantism.
Posted by: Lee Sigelman | August 20, 2009 03:55 PM
“guys standing around trying to catch their breath while waiting for the clock finally to restart so they can ply their trade for about six seconds”
Jeeze, how many plays in baseball last longer than six seconds? When’s the last time you saw football stop while the QB warms up? In what other sport will men run full speed at each other from 50 yrds away resulting in an in a inelastic collision? Where else in sports is the self-sacrifice, the self control of the interior offensive lineman?
I started as a freshman on the Varsity team in high school, the best men I have ever known…bar none, were my teammates, even the ones I didn’t like…I wish them well…each and every one. I never felt that about any baseball team I played on.
Posted by: S Brennan | August 21, 2009 12:28 AM
S Brennan:
Again, baseball wasn’t designed to run by a clock. Of course there’s lots of standing around in baseball. Let’s move on.
Now, men running full speed from fifty yards away to result in an inelastic collision is a good thing? (1) I don’t see many football players out there, except the wide receivers and defensive backs (both of whom are superbly conditioned athletes) running 50 yards at a time on anything except kickoffs. (2) Even if they did/could, inelastic collisions aren’t my definition of a good sporting event.
Self-sacrifice by interior offensive linemen? Well, that’s what I was. Played all those years and never touched the ball, even once. My, what fun.
I’m pleased to hear that you had great football teammates (no sarcasm intended). I don’t understand how that bears on the conversation, though. (I had great baseball teammates. Of course, because I grew up in a small town, my baseball teammates were the same people as my football teammates. :-) )
Posted by: Lee Sigelman | August 21, 2009 09:53 AM
Here’s the solution to football: Tivo the game, and then as soon as the down ends, do eight seconds back followed by a thirty second skip. 90% of the time, that will get you to the point where the team is walking up to the line of scrimmage. Throw in the fact that you can skip all the commercials, and I’ve gotten to the point where I can watch a whole game in under an hour. Now, this isn’t really a social experience, but if you’ve got little kids and don’t have three hours free on a Sunday afternoon, it works great.
Posted by: Joshua Tucker
|
August 21, 2009 11:50 AM
One problem with Will’s analysis: the huddle is not a “committee meeting”. The players are not debating which plays to run, they are being told by the quarterback…
Posted by: Dan Tarrant | August 21, 2009 06:56 PM