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?
No. 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!)
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.
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.
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=7ySCr0-p2Q4&mode=related&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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think this is a common myth. Two big examples last september the Detroit Tigers had a comfortable lead in their division and collapsed limping into the playoffs but still managed to get together and make it to the WS. Samething with the colts went from 1st to third late in the season had to play an extra playoff game still became super Bowl champions. I do agree the best way to determine the best team is to have a balanced schedule and the team withthe most wins/points is number one. But in american sports we dont even have balanced schedules so there would be no point in it.
It depends what you are trying to say. If you are asking if winning a title when it doesn't go down to the last game is an anticlimax, then no, it isn't. If, on the other hand, if you asking whether it'd be better to clinch promotion/title with a result (e.g. getting a win that makes you 4 points clear with a game to go) rather than the other team dropping points when you aren't playing, then yes, it would be much better to clinch it with a result. I wouldn't say it would be an anti-climax though, just not as good.
To me, leagues are climactic. It's just different. It's like being high on meth for 10 hours compared to the Cups which is like that 10 minute crack cocaine high. Part of it might be down to understanding the importance and value of the league, and of every point that each match has to offer. Maybe for Americans it's too hard to grasp at first because they just see it as "who cares if they lost today? They still might win the trophy! I might as well not bother watching it."
It's just different. There is something intensely satisfying about watching a game and knowing that whoever wins will be the champion. There is also something intensely satisfying about knowing that the champion will be the BEST team instead of just the team who happened to do better over 1 or 5 or 7 games. That's one of the things I love about football - the existence of different forms of competition means you get both - the league champion who manages it over the long haul and the Cup winner who strings together a few great games. And if one team manages them both, it really shows their class.
I don't know exactly what you mean here. Certainly in the regular seasons of American sports leagues, it's possible to lose games and still win the championship.
um, no. ask a Broncos fan, pretty sure they remember Elway's first Super Bowl. Bears fan? 1986. Pats fan? Vinitieri's FGs are probably fresh in their minds. and the list goes on.
Google hits for /"The Drive" Elway/ -- 26,600 Google hits for /"Super Bowl XXXII" Elway/ -- 11,800 As for the Pats, I'd say Vinitieri's field goal in the snow against the Raiders is more memorable than any of the three Super Bowls.
Yes definetly. The NFL playoffs certainly hold a lot of memories for fans. But it's like the World Cup or Champions League.... most of the great memories didn't happen in the final match.