Response to Franks Deford, "Sometime One, Is Enough"

In Frank Deford article, “Sometimes, One Is Enough”, he is informing his audience on his feeling that the “best of seven” game series is no longer needed. He goes on supporting this argument by stating the fact that the “best of seven” dates back to 1894, with The Temple Cup which was the National League forerunner to the World Series. The year 1894 lacked advanced technology so televisions weren’t invented and only few radios were. The only money that came to the games, were from those who bought the tickets to see the game. So of course as his grandfather stated, “the more games, the more money” which then was an economical logical reasoning to earn more money. Now he doesn’t see the purpose in the “best of seven” because due to technology there are many ways we can see and hear the games. In addition to that, Deford believe the “best of seven” games series are being dragged out without the suspense. Due to this he thinks there should be only one game championships but he knows that the MLB, NBA, AND NHL will never comply with this therefore he suggests his solution that the games should be “best of three out of four”. That way the suspense and tension would be blatant and more fans would watch and care.

Personally, when Deford makes his comments about the MLB, I can not agree or disagree with is opposition only because I do not watch baseball other than 3 strikes and your out I know nothing about baseball.

Today I think we care about the “best of seven” because its tradition. We want to see our teams perform their best and make it to the championship or series so we can see them take home the gold. We travel with our teams most often by television supporting and chanting for their win. It as if we one with the team but the only difference is we are not with them physically and we are not actually on the team. The best of seven are the last games of the season; it marks the end of an awing season.