[m1150]

OK, I understand the comparative advantage of the European league-and-cup system over the American regular-season-and-playoffs system, and I'm not out to reignite the debate over which is better.

But... on Sunday, I saw pictures of Man U fans celebrating after Chelsea drew, clinching the Premiership title for their team.

I also seem to remember a few years ago, when the Premiership winner clinched with an away game or the second-place team's loss, and the club scheduled a victory celebration for after their next home match... which they went on to lose.

So my question is... isn't clinching the title in this manner (rather than after your team's win) kind of, I don't know, anticlimactic?

Also, if a team wins the FA Cup, are there the same kind of celebrations, parades and the like?

[Ian Daglers]

Originally Posted by m1150

OK, I understand the comparative advantage of the European league-and-cup system over the American regular-season-and-playoffs system, and I'm not out to reignite the debate over which is better.

But... on Sunday, I saw pictures of Man U fans celebrating after Chelsea drew, clinching the Premiership title for their team.

I also seem to remember a few years ago, when the Premiership winner clinched with an away game or the second-place team's loss, and the club scheduled a victory celebration for after their next home match... which they went on to lose.

So my question is... isn't clinching the title in this manner (rather than after your team's win) kind of, I don't know, anticlimactic?

No.

Originally Posted by m1150

Also, if a team wins the FA Cup, are there the same kind of celebrations, parades and the like?

Depends on the team. I seriously doubt Chelsea will be having an open-top bus parade if they take the FA Cup. Man United will, but only on account of winning the league as well. For Blackburn or Watford, on the other hand, yes, there would be a parade and great rejoicing (and not just in Blackburn or Watford!)

[glennaldo_sf]

Originally Posted by m1150

So my question is... isn't clinching the title in this manner (rather than after your team's win) kind of, I don't know, anticlimactic?

NO!

What I find anticlimactic is when the team with the 8th best record in a league of twelve teams qualifies for a playoff system at the end of the season, wins a couple of knock out games and are then claimed champions of the country! Could you imagine if the Scottish premiership were decided this way? ... Inverness CT, who finished som 41 points below champions Celtic could win!!! The league table does not lie. The league table is the best way to decide the champions of a nation.

[m1150]

Originally Posted by glennaldo_sf

NO!

What I find anticlimactic is when the team with the 8th best record in a league of twelve teams qualifies for a playoff system at the end of the season, wins a couple of knock out games and are then claimed champions of the country! Could you imagine if the Scottish premiership were decided this way? ... Inverness CT, who finished som 41 points below champions Celtic could win!!! The league table does not lie. The league table is the best way to decide the champions of a nation.

I can see how the playoff system is not the best way to determine the "best" team, as has been much discussed in these forums.

But I certainly don't see it as anticlimactic, since a playoff tournament always ends with a victory by the "champion" in an all-encompassing final game, followed by a trophy presentation, the spraying of champagne, and the overturning of cars outside the stadium.

[leg_breaker]

I don't see the problem with a tournament being anticlimactic. Golf tournaments, motor races and marathons can be all but over long before the end, but no-one suggests playoffs there. What's so special about the end of the season that games there should count more than games earlier on? A football doesn't know what date it is.

A playoff can be anticlimactic if the final is a completely missmatch.

[John Shuttleworth]

Originally Posted by m1150

I can see how the playoff system is not the best way to determine the "best" team, as has been much discussed in these forums.

But I certainly don't see it as anticlimactic, since a playoff tournament always ends with a victory by the "champion" in an all-encompassing final game, followed by a trophy presentation, the spraying of champagne, and the overturning of cars outside the stadium.

Well we do have the cup competitions to provide us with the great finale occasions remember. The FA Cup, UEFA and European Champions Finals. Remember the remarkable scenes when Liverpool last returned as European champions? Not the best bit of footage but you get the idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOu2WTBV6kQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ySCr...elated&search=

Most clubs will celebrate an FA cup win, though I agree Chelsea may not be so inclined to this season because of their masive expectations.

Plus increasingly the play-off final to win promotion to the Premiership is a tremendous event. That really is all to play-for do or die stuff when you consider the winner will earn an extra £60 million ($120 million) the following season. They most certainly celebrate winning that one.

[MNAFETSC]

Originally Posted by leg_breaker

I don't see the problem with a tournament being anticlimactic. Golf tournaments, motor races and marathons can be all but over long before the end, but no-one suggests playoffs there. What's so special about the end of the season that games there should count more than games earlier on? A football doesn't know what date it is.

A playoff can be anticlimactic if the final is a completely missmatch.

The difference between those sports and leagues is they only last a couple hours or a weekened for golf wheres as leagues last several months. But yes in one off finals like the Super Bowl when its a blow out it can be pretty boring as a few super bowls have been for neutral fans.

[Warbuxx]

Originally Posted by m1150

I can see how the playoff system is not the best way to determine the "best" team, as has been much discussed in these forums.

But I certainly don't see it as anticlimactic, since a playoff tournament always ends with a victory by the "champion" in an all-encompassing final game, followed by a trophy presentation, the spraying of champagne, and the overturning of cars outside the stadium.

It depends on whether the focus of of ones attention is a single match or a season. Examples:
1) The winner of Formula 1 over a season does not necessarily win the last race of the season. I don't know how NASCAR works, but I imagine it's the same.

2) The winner of a cycle race like the Tour de France does not necessarily win the sprint on the last day nor necessarily even win any of the preceding few races.

The American system rewards teams that are in form at the time of the playoffs. The championship teams are those at their peak over an interval of a few weeks. So a team with significant injuries at an unfortunate time is out of luck. The League system in soccer is designed to determine the nation's best team over a full season. It does precisely that and is therefore a truer championship.

World Soccer gives the best of both scenarious by offering the elimination system of the Cups as well as the round robin system of the Leagues. I can't imagine what could be fairer than that.

[m1150]

Originally Posted by MNAFETSC

The difference between those sports and leagues is they only last a couple hours or a weekened for golf wheres as leagues last several months. But yes in one off finals like the Super Bowl when its a blow out it can be pretty boring as a few super bowls have been for neutral fans.

The Super Bowl is always anticlimactic. The whole season is called "The Road to the Super Bowl." Then there's a two-week gap after the penultimate games where they do nothing but talk about the Super Bowl. Then there's a 10-hour pregame show. Then KISS comes out and performs before the player introductions. Then there's a bunch of explosions and confetti and balloons. Then there's the halftime show, which is a $10 million extravaganza, and all of the new TV advertisements for the year are shown for the first time throughout the telecast.

With all of that hype, it's impossible for a mere sporting event to live up to it. That's why if you ask an NFL fan to recall his favorite football moment, he'll never mention a Super Bowl game. No one ever remembers the games themselves.

[m1150]

Originally Posted by Warbuxx

It depends on whether the focus of of ones attention is a single match or a season. Examples:
1) The winner of Formula 1 over a season does not necessarily win the last race of the season. I don't know how NASCAR works, but I imagine it's the same.

Not anymore. To ensure the end of the season isn't anticlimactic, NASCAR has introduced a pseudo-playoff system called "The Chase for the Cup." With 10 races left to go, NASCAR basically wipes out the point standings. The top-ranked driver is given 5,120 points, the second driver 5,110 points, and all the way down to the 12th-ranked guy, who gets 5,000. Everyone else keeps the 500 or howevermany points they have, so they can't possibly win the Nextel Cup.

This is meant to ensure the points race comes down to the wire.