If the Patriots convert one first down at the end of the AFC championship, they run out the clock, win the game and Manning doesn't win his "big game" and is still a choker.

On the snickers ad, I think the problem with debating its level of offensiveness is there's not that much content there. If we agree that the kissing was not offensive, then the only offensive part is the extreme reaction of the men. Was that reaction intended to show how stupid these guys were or to show that this is a normal and proper reaction. More likely than not, it was neither because it was an ad for a product and there was no intent to convey a social message; nor could any social message be gleaned from the ad. Therefore, the reaction is really in the eye of the beholder.

This column proves that two weeks without football in January will render even the best columnist delerious.

I totally agree with this column that the 2 week thing is awful and counterproductive. The way it works for me is that I end up seeing championship sunday as the real end of the season and, unless my team is playing, the Super Bowl as an exhibition, not to get too excited about since it's not really about the football anyway.

But what is the NFL's logic behind the 2 week layoff? They must have a reason.

I'm assuming these nutjobs advocating relegation (or is it rendition) in American sports are either foreigners who have no understanding of the American sports scene or are soccer fans, nuff said there. The thing the relegation advocates are neglecting is that for the teams in the second division, NO ONE WOULD WATCH THE GAMES! How do you propose dealing with that small problem?

Wes and James, can the two of you please GET A ROOM!

Seeding doesn't matter in the NHL playoffs. The fact that the top seeds win more oftne than not and go farther in the playoffs is simply indicative of the fact that they are the better teams. for example, this year Buffalo is the best team in the East and will likely be the number one seed and the team most likely to play for the cup, because they are the best, not because they are the number one seed. Consider hypothetically if Buffalo kind of "coasted" for the rest of the season and finished third, the fact that they are third instead of first will not hurt their chances in the playoffs so long as the reason they dropped to third has nothing to do with their ability to prevail in the playoffs. A better example might be where a team's star player is hurt during the season but comes back for the playoffs, costing them in the standings but not hurting their chances in the playoffs.

On the whole "big one" issue. even though the issue is always framed as "can Payton manning win the big one" I think with many people this is just a way of saying that "Payton Manning will never be remembered in history as an all-time great quarterback unless he wins a championship." Sure, if the issue is framed as one of heart, guts, and determination it's pretty nonsensical, but if you think of it the other way it makes more sense. For example, as I remember, many, if not most people at the time thought that Marino was the best QB in the league as of his second year and for several years after that. Similarly, many people in the late '70s thought Fouts was the best. But now it just doesn't feel right to say Marino was better than Montana or Fouts better than Stabler or Staubach, because he didn't win the "big one." I think this is what the debate really boils down to.

The Boise game was one of the greatest finishes I've ever seen. the Boise coach has to get a lot of credit for his great play calling. I totally agree with the sentiment expressed in this column. Bowl games are an exhibiition and are worth watching only for a cheap thrill, the one night stand of sports. They have no long term significance.

Just one question, I've always thought the name of the play is "hook and lateral" and that "hook and ladder" was just what some announcers mistakenly used.

doesn't division 1AA, division II and Division III college football employ a playoff system that everyone involved recognizes as fair and exciting and which at the end allows one team to stand up and proclaim that they won the title fair and square? Am I missing something here? Why wouldn't this be a good system for the big boys?