E.K. NATION

We begin today's quick lesson by pointing out that this is simple math, people. Very simple math.

• Friday night, Hawaii trails Wisconsin by three possessions, 41-17, in the closing minute. With 16 seconds left, Hawaii scores a TD, and kicks the extra-point to remain three possessions behind. Now, granted, with 16 seconds remaining to score two more touchdowns, what are the odds, right? But still: Go for the two. That way, if you make it, you're down 16, or two possessions. It is possible to get an onside kick, do a Hail Mary, get another onside kick and do one more Hail Mary in 16 seconds. You just need to do the first three in 15 seconds and leave one second left. And if you believe there's no way that can happen, the game is over, well, you still have nothing to lose. Practice the two-pointer.

• Sunday, Baltimore trails Cincinnati 42-21. Kyle Boller hits Todd Heap for a TD with 2:03 left. There must have been a comet somewhere over Ohio that affected brainwave patterns, because the Ravens elected to go for two. Why? You don't need it. You miss, you're down 15 and you still need to get a two-pointer if you want to have a chance at tying the game. Go for one, and get to within 14 points.

• Sunday, Browns trail Minnesota 24-6. Dennis Northcutt catches a TD pass to make it 24-12, and inexplicably Cleveland goes for two. And Cleveland misses. Now this braintrust is still down two touchdowns, when it could have gone for one and gotten to within a touchdown and field goal. A lot less to do with the 1:12 you have left, if you are able to kick for points. Sheer non-brilliance.

There really should be a course taught to every football coach. We've seen some silly-ass usage of the two-point conversion, and some non-usage as well. You're down 14-12 after you score a touchdown and you go for one?

The best show in the history of television is "Arrested Development." Anyone who can't make money off of "Arrested Development" should get out of the money-making business.

On two counts: 1), that someone other than the deserving Roger Clemens would win the National League Cy Young Award, and 2), that Roger Clemens deserved it over everyone else.

We'll simply make this link to a piece at Fire Joe Morgan. The author found an article by some jackass who makes stupid arguments why Clemens did not deserve it, and it's probably a better read than what we could come up with here. We think the arguments the moron makes are funny, except that they're sad and not funny. Amazing that anyone would make a comment like this and go from there:

Get over the notion that Roger Clemens deserved his eighth Cy Young Award on the basis that he had the lowest ERA in 10 years and is as old as the Rocky Mountains and equally as admired.

And it doesn't get any better.

Last year we chose the Detroit Pistons to win the NBA Finals (against...Minnesota? That was stupid!), but the jerks lost in the NBA Finals. Again, we don't know much here!
VARSITY:

THE DIVISION CHAMPIONS:

THE PLAYOFF TEAMS:

VARSITY FINALS:

over

JUNIOR VARSITY:

THE DIVISION CHAMPIONS:

THE PLAYOFF TEAMS:

JUNIOR VARSITY FINALS:

over

2006 NBA FINALS:

over

What's the point, what's the goddamn point in honoring players with various awards for their performances during the season if you're not going to give it to the right guy?

Bartolo Colon had a good year, yes. But both Mariano Rivera and Johan Santana had much better years. We would take the time t list why, but ESPN's Jayson Stark has already done so in a column that pretty much sums it all up. Here's the best passage:

Santana piled up 81 more strikeouts, beat Colon in ERA by 61 points, allowed almost two fewer baserunners for every nine innings, and had more innings pitched, complete games and shutouts.

Hitters who faced Colon had a batting average of .254 against him. The on-base percentage against Santana was .250. Any more objections, your honor?

True, Colon had five more wins than Santana (21 vs. 16). But since Santana actually pitched more innings, how was that win gap his fault? The win differential is a stat we can attribute almost completely to their offenses. It's that basic.

Santana piled up 81 more strikeouts, beat Colon in ERA by 61 points, allowed almost two fewer baserunners for every nine innings, and had more innings pitched, complete games and shutouts.

Colon got a ridiculous 1.32 more runs per game than Santana did. And Santana's totals in his last three no-decisions tell it all: 23 innings, 9 hits, 3 runs, 0 wins.

And that's not including the part where Mariano Rivera's season is detailed (although it is noted he is a closer, not starter, so the comparisons are a little harder to decipher).

We are so sick and tired of wins being giving so much favor when it comes to deciding who the best pitcher was. It's true: Wins are entirely dependent on how well the pitcher's offense does during games in which he pitches. You can allow exactly one run, no more, no less, in 35 consecutive complete games during a season and still go 0-35, if your offense gets shutout in every one of those games. Conversely, a guy who gives up exactly six runs every game can go 35-0 if only his offense scores seven or more each time he takes the mound.

Colon for Cy Young is an embarrassment.

And when the National League Cy Young winner is announced, you can bet it will be either Cris Carpenter or Dontrelle Willis. When it actually should be Roger Clemens. Check the Rocket's game log. He lost three straight 1-0 games in which he pitched seven inning and allowed precisely zero runs, all because his team couldn't get one measly run over.

Clemens went 13-8. So what? He lost five 1-0 games. His team scores two measly runs in every one of those and suddenly he's looking at potential record of 18-3. This is an illustration of why wins are not important in determining the league's best pitcher.

Willis went 22-10 with an ERA of 2.63. Carpenter was 21-5 with an ERA of 2.83. Clemens was 13-8 with an ERA of 1.87.

Throw out the win totals and just look at the ERAs.

Anyway, it won't be Clemens collecting yet another trophy. And that's a goddamn shame.