Ferdinand Cesarano

Eventually.

All true. And a handful of exceptions doesn't change the validity of that general practice. The fact (not theory) is that young kids will tend to be at home at 8pm, whereas they are far less likely to be home at 3pm on a weekend, when there are a million other things to do. Politely ignoring the contradiction in that statement, I will agree that prioritising education is the correct approach. The point is that allowing a few late nights for special occasions does not compromise that approach. Also, let us realise that a person's education entails a lot more than school. There are also cultural reference points that make up part of one's education. My father made me watch Nixon's resignation in August of 1974 simply on account of that event's historical magnitude, even though I, not quite nine years of age at the time, could not fully appreciate its meaning. But my father felt, correctly, that I should have that event as part of my memory, as part of my experience, as part of my education. And likewise for the significant sporting events. No one who saw Fisk's home run in 1975 or Chambliss's home run in 1976 came away unaffected; these events made up essential parts of our enculturation and therefore of our education. A decade later, a new generation of kids had the formative experience of witnessing Buckner's error in game 6 of the 1986 World Series. All of these events happened late at night; yet they were viewed by millions and became cultural touchstones. Starting a game at 3pm on a Saturday or Sunday consigns that game to a kind of obscurity, a second-class status; this is not consistent with the magnitude of a playoff or World Series game. As I mentioned, most of the kids I knew did not see the 1973 World Series game that I posted — even though that game involved the Mets! They were just busy doing other things, as normal kids will be doing on a weekend afternoon. But they would surely have seen the game if it had been a night game, just as everyone saw the Fisk, Chambliss, and Buckner games that have become part of our collective memory. The ideal time to start would be 8:00, prime time; the absolute earliest should be 6:30, the hour that the Super Bowl kicks off (even though that leaves West Coast viewers in the unpleasant 3:30 netherworld). The key point is that you can let your kids stay up a few nights a year for important events while still maintaining a bedtime that is appropriate for preparing them for school.

MOD EDIT: We're going to pretend that exchange never happened. I got to see Carlton Fisk's historic home run in the 1975 World Series, even though it came after midnight on a weeknight, because my parents let me at age 10 stay up past my bedtime — on account of this being the World f-ing Series. The next year, I got to experience the joy of Chris Chambliss's pennant-winning homer, even though it came at around midnight, which was well past my bedtime as an 11-year-old. This remains my most cherished sports memory, one that can bring tears upon re-watching. I am so grateful that my parents were sensible enough to let me stay up to experience this historic event. And, judging from the frenzied reaction at school the next day from other kids who had been watching, most of them had parents who were equally sensible. The idea of missing these era-defining occurences in order to adhere to an arbitrary bedtime is outrageous. For a mere handful of nights per year, ignoring a bedtime is no problem. That is how you build fans and promote the love of history. Also, while it is true that kids now have plenty of screen-based activities that keep them indoors, it does not follow that playing outside is a thing of the past. When I am out riding my bike, I see plenty of kids running around, riding their own bikes, playing basketball, football, and even baseball. Playing outside is a universal and timeless act of childhood. So there is no doubt that fewer kids will be watching a postseason baseball game that starts at 3:00 or 4:00 in the afternoon than one that starts at 8:00 at night. Nighttime postseason baseball is better for people of all ages, for the simple reason that nighttime is when people of all ages are more likely to be able to watch.

The YouTube channel Sports Revisited just put up one of the greatest World Series games of all time, and a fond memory from my childhood. It is game 2 of the 1973 World Series. Not only is it this a great game, but it is a beautiful uniform matchup as well. Side point: this game is also an argument for why all postseason games should be played at night. Yes, the uniforms look beautiful in the sunshine. But I later found to my dismay that few of my friends had seen this game, because on a Sunday afternoon most kids are going to be outside playing. Many people repeat the idea that night baseball is bad for attracting kids. In my opinion, this is wrong. You lose many more kids with day games, as most kids who have to endure school all week are not going to sit inside on a weekend afternoon when they could be outside running around. But I sure am glad that I eschewed playing outside on that particular day and that I stayed in to watch this epic game. My 1972-1973 playlist has every game of the truly classic 1973 World Series on TV or radio or both. (Though one of the games is there only in a half-hour condensed version of the television broadcast.) This is a terribly underrated World Series, probably due to its proximity to the famous 1975 Series. Anyone who is unfamiliar with the 1973 Series would do well to take this opportunity to get to know it.

My money's on "Baltimore Ravens", with "Albuquerque Isotopes" a close second.

Here is a playlist of the majority of All-Star Games from 1934 to 1996.

In this period when no live sports are available, a good thing to do is to dive into games from the past. While doing this, it is best to avoid the well-known games; Fisk's home run is going to hit that pole every time. The thing to do is to groove on games whose outcome you do not know, such as an obscure mid-season game. If you don't know the outcome of a game, then you can experience that game as a contest, rather than merely as an historical document. To have this sort of engagement with Joe DiMaggio or Willie Mays or any of the other players from the past, even temporarily, is very rewarding. Luckily, recordings of such games abound. In an effort to provide quality sports programming while the leagues aren't playing, I'd like to offer my playlists of recordings of baseball games organised by year. These lists consist of regular-season games, postseason games, and All-Star Games. In a few instances, other extras are thrown in, such as a couple of exhibition softball games, videos about baseball in the early part of the twentieth century, and even some episodes of Jack Benny's radio show that deal with listening to various World Series games in the 1940s. The earliest radio broadcasts of games come from 1934. The radio broadcasts go through the 1960s and into the 1970, at which point the composition of the playlists transitions to mainly television broadcasts. 1930s and before 1940s 1950-1956 1957-1959 1960-1961 1962 1963-1964 1965-1966 1967-1968 1969 1970-1971 1972-1973 1974-1975 1976-1977 1978 1979 1980 April-August 1980 September-October 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 April-July 1993 August-October 1994-1995 1996 Enjoy!

"OF"?!!

Upvoted solely for the mention of that delightful show! (Now we are so happy, we do the Dance of Joy!) In the greatest sitcom of all-time, The Odd Couple, Oscar Madison, as portrayed by Jack Klugman, frequently wore a Met cap, and sometimes a Yankee cap. Walter Matthau as Oscar had originated the practice of wearing a Met cap in the movie. And Demond Wilson and Matthew Perry continued the tradition of wearing Met gear as Oscar in later television versions. (Wilson's Oscar took bipartisanship to a new level.) The wearing of team hats and jerseys is commonplace today. But it was far less so in the 1970s when the original Odd Couple series was made. And rarer still is this example from 1964 (even before the Odd Couple movie), from an episode of the sitcom The Joey Bishop Show. The character of the apartment building handyman Jillson, played by the great Joe Besser (who is best known as the bizarre man-child Stinky on The Abbott and Costello Show, and who also was a very good post-Shemp member of the The Three Stooges) wears a Brooklyn Dodger cap, and emphatically calls Joey's attention to it.

Maybe San Diego's best chance is the move of the Wildcats.

Good call. This, coming right after two classic and extremely dignified-looking Yankee-Dodger World Series, was absolutely atrocious.

I agree about the unfortunate lost momentum. I was genuinely excited about the resurgent Guardians facing the huge challenge of playing the mighty Houston Roughnecks this coming weekend; and I am so disappointed that I won't be able to experience that. The whole league has been fun. With only eight teams in the league, it is possible for a fan to watch every game (or, in the case of D.C. and Houston, to listen). Having that kind of overview is tremendous. Also, there are plenty of good podcasts devoted to the analysis and discussion of the league. (One of the fan-run podcasts was so good that it was adopted by the league and became officialised!) It occurs to me that the fun of listening to these shows is similar to how I am grooving on Star Trek: Picard (or how I will be diving back in to the new season of Westworld), with all the fan-driven media enhancing the enjoyment. The days right after the weekend were taken up by XFL podcasts, just as the days after Thursday have been taken up by Picard podcasts. I dug following the XFL so much that it wound up taking my attention away from NYCFC and the rest of MLS. But I don't agree that the teams' rosters will necessarily be very different next season. Stars like Walker and Ta'amu may well be off to the NFL; but I think it's a good bet that the vast majority of players who played in the league this year to be back in it next year. In the AAF about one player per team got an NFL contract (roster or practice squad); even if the XFL's average is two or three times that, this would still mean that most players will be coming back. By this time next year, Luis Perez could well be the best quarterback in the league! One other note. You observed that the general attitude towards the league moved from reflexive mockery all the way to serious discussion about play, and noted that this is an accomplishment in itself. Another thing the league accomplished was to have a controversy and to come out of it looking better than before. After the officiating mistake at the end of the Houston-Seattle game, the league issued a quick and decisive response. Criticism of the league for the mistake was overtaken by praise for the league's handing of the mistake; remarkably, this event wound up earning the XFL good publicity rather than bad publicity. A main reason is that the league had already created a great deal of goodwill around the issue of officiating, by means of its transparency. On this basis the XFL earned the respect of many fans and even some in the media. A lot went right in this truncated first XFL season. Given that McMahon is willing to absorb the additional cost of the lost ticket revenue for the second half of the season and the playoffs, and to continue funding the league, then I expect that the XFL will encounter an audience that is eager to welcome its return. So I really doubt that next season will be like another first year.

I couldn't find a currently open thread on this matter; so I thought I would start one. On the very funny HBO show Avenue 5, there have been several instances of current (or slightly older than current) logos and jerseys. This is odd because the show is set in 2060. It makes sense to me that someone in that year would wear the Cavs jersey of an all-time great like LeBron James. This is the equivalent of someone wearing a Magic or Bird jersey today. But are we expected to believe that Ezekiel Elliott will be equally fondly remembered in forty years' time? And evidently there will still be some merchandise available then that has the old NFL shield logo. Clearly this show put no effort into selecting these articles of clothing. This is a bit surprising for a show that is otherwise very well designed. By contrast, a show that was paying attention to this question might have had some fun whipping up some plausible future logos for these teams and leagues.

It feels right now like these seasons are over. But perhaps after tests are widely available, we'll know exactly who has the illness and needs to be quarantined. At that point, all these extreme measures that are necessary in the absence of good data can be relaxed. The question is: how long will it take for tests to be widely available? Let's hope that it's just a matter of weeks. If this can be done in South Korea, it presumably can be done in other countries. Well, he didn't ruin anything. I mean, his act of touching all those microphones was a stunning display of foolishness. But even if he had not done that, he and his teammate would still have tested positive. The NBA would then have suspended operations, and all the rest of these cancellations would have followed just the same. Gobert embarrassed himself; but he didn't cause anything that wasn't going to happen anyway.

Right. Each NFL game in London is a special event. Whereas, if a specific team moved to London, well, that team might stink. And this would crater the interest in the whole affair. (Earlier I mentioned that having a schedule in which the Jaguars played eight straight "road" games in London would be great for the players' quality of life. This may be so; but that sort of arrangement would not be good for the overall sake of the NFL in London project.) This is true. Of course, let's set aside the fact that FIFA rules prohibit a team playing outside of its league's country without specific permission (usually based on the lack of a top-flight league in one of the countries); and let's set aside as well as the lack of a tradition of team relocations in England, such that even the move of Wimbledon Dons to Milton Keynes was considered a big scandal. By contrast, American sports leagues have no rules preventing the placement of a team in another country; and here team relocations are unremarkable (even if painful for one group of fans). But, even if we could imagine a fantasy world in which those factors didn't exist, and in which a U.S.-based team in the Premier League would be possible, the point stands that, while every visit to the U.S. of Man United, Man City, Arsenal, Liverpool, or Chelsea is a big event, a U.S.-based Premier League team would not sustain popularity if it were not near the top of the league. Fulham is not even "THE Fulham club".