I agree, and often ponder what play I would call were I a coordinator.
Note this is also the argument political columnist George Will used to enshrine baseball as the "thinking man's sport", where there's no hard limit between plays. But I prefer football precisely because of the time pressure; it's rather like chess without clocks vs. chess with clocks. (Pitcher checks the runner, steps off the rubber, runner retakes base, pitcher steps on the rubber, gets sign from catcher, winds up, checks the runner again, batter steps out, grabs some dirt, rubs bottom of bat, reseats helmet, steps in box, pounds plate with bat, pumps a couple times, pitcher gets sign from catcher ... lather, rinse, repeat. I've had my fill long ago.)
Back when I was a tyke, televised baseball games (with Dizzy Dean and Buddy Blattner, sponsored by Falstaff, Pabst or Hamms beer) usually took about two hours. Now it's three hours for the same amount of action, and the beers are only slightly better.
I agree, and often ponder what play I would call were I a coordinator.
Note this is also the argument political columnist George Will used to enshrine baseball as the "thinking man's sport", where there's no hard limit between plays. But I prefer football precisely because of the time pressure; it's rather like chess without clocks vs. chess with clocks. (Pitcher checks the runner, steps off the rubber, runner retakes base, pitcher steps on the rubber, gets sign from catcher, winds up, checks the runner again, batter steps out, grabs some dirt, rubs bottom of bat, reseats helmet, steps in box, pounds plate with bat, pumps a couple times, pitcher gets sign from catcher ... lather, rinse, repeat. I've had my fill long ago.)
Back when I was a tyke, televised baseball games (with Dizzy Dean and Buddy Blattner, sponsored by Falstaff, Pabst or Hamms beer) usually took about two hours. Now it's three hours for the same amount of action, and the beers are only slightly better.