NLL Insider

It’s one of the oldest debates among fans of the National Lacrosse League, but it’s always fun to revisit the topic and hear everyone’s take on it. The question: Should the NLL decide its champion with a one-game, winner-take-all matchup as it currently does? Or should the league adopt an odd-game series, whether it be three, five or seven games? There’s plenty of fodder for both sides and it’s not like the NLL hasn’t tried the series approach. Philadelphia won its 1998 title by beating Baltimore in two games in a best-of-three series. But every other title in NLL history has been decided by a single game.

Of course, Canadian fans are used to the seven-game approach used by the Mann Cup and Minto Cup along with various other league titles. The series approach gives teams more forgiveness in case there’s a bad outing. Get back out there and make up for it, right? More tickets and more revenue are to be made through the series approach, and fans get a pretty good deal with plenty of lacrosse to watch. Just look back to this year’s Mann Cup. If New Westminster’s Game 1 victory gives the Cup to the Salmonbellies, then we’re not treated to the rest of the series and what many are calling it a championship for the ages.

Of course, having a series of games can present a host of other issues. First and foremost, expense and travel. Lacrosse isn’t exactly rolling in the dough from huge TV contracts and corporate sponsorship. Most of the players work day jobs, as well, so getting away from work that pays the bills can present a challenge. Even in this year’s Mann Cup, Brampton was without a few of its starters for a couple of games because of work commitments.

So whaddya think? A single game? Or an odd-game series? If you were commish for a season, who would the National Lacrosse League title be decided?

 Loading ...

Rate This Story:

(+7 rating, 11 votes)

 Loading ...