An endless desire for change

I firmly believe that the pursuit of perfection can eventually begin to do more harm than good. Nothing in this life is truly perfect, and the NFL is no different. Under the leadership of Roger Goodell, however, the NFL has seen consistent rule changes in almost every off-season, and the recent discussion on removing the extra point from the NFL has got to be where the line is drawn in the sand. Goodell has called the PAT  "practically automatic", citing the five PAT misses this season out of around 1200 attempts.

My main rationale for keeping the extra point is two-fold. One, the PAT is one of the oldest plays in NFL history, and to change it changes the scoring system in a way that works against teams trying to mount a comeback.  Number two, the PAT is one of three plays in the NFL that relies on a place kicker, the other two being a field goal and the kickoff.

Removing the PAT lessens the importance of a place kicker, lowering the salaries of some of the NFL's least paid players. And if you thought everyone in the NFL was rolling in cash, you're wrong. Now, it may not raise much empathy in the minds of the general public for place kickers, but the fact remains that without kicking a PAT, the burden of securing a point after falls on the offense. More offensive snaps means more throws from the quarterback, more rushes from the runningback. In addition to added wear and tear on the star players at these positions, point after attempts will reduce the money paid to kickers and instead shovel more cash onto the heaping contracts paid to the offensive stars.

Now, if a play is really thought to be "too automatic", perhaps the play could be amended,instead of being deleted entirely. Removing one of the oldest plays in the NFL is lazy, but making a small change to increase the difficulty for the betterment of competition, now that is something I could get behind. Moving the spot of the ball back to the 15 yard line is a possible solution, making the kick harder to make and easier for opponents to block.

I understand the NFL's prerogative to  deliver the "best" product to it's fans, but this is not the way to do it. The PAT is not doing the game any harm, and I'm hoping it doesn't become the newest casualty of Roger Goodell's boredom.

You can't always get what you want

Mascots have long been a symbol of strength and identity for teams ranging from youth sports to professional sports. Some of them have historical importance, some play off the stereotypes of a group of people, and others are based off of animals.

The Chicago Cubs are one of the oldest and tradition rich sports franchises in the world, so naturally my curiosity was peaked when I heard they had finally selected an actual mascot to be the face of the franchise.

I got this.

Pants are for squares, I always say!

I don't like this mascot. It's not intimidating, it doesn't exude competitive excellence, and it gives me the willies. I mean, why is the bear so dang happy? Just think, this probably took them months of production by countless unpaid interns to design, color and release. And after all of that, I get this.

THIS is the new face of the Chicago Cubs. I mean, it was bad enough to accept season after season of lackluster effort, but now I get to do it while watching the Bernstein Bear on ecstasy.

To rub salt in the wound, this horrible rendition of your brain on drugs has a Twitter account, and it already has about 4,000 more followers than mine, and it's a day old.

Between Clark the hyperactive Cub and Jay Cutler's 7 hear hockey contract, I've been thrown into a pit of despair from which I may never emerge.