The Pulse Newsletter 📣 | This is The Athletic’s daily sports newsletter. Sign up here to receive The Pulse directly in your inbox.Good morning! Coming up today, to close out July:
Queries: Four questions for our expertsWe’re back with another Pulse mailbag, where we find the right Athletic staffer to answer reader questions. I had fun sifting through hundreds of your submissions to find this Friday-friendly mix of practical and philosophical entries. Enjoy!Will the Super Bowl and other championship games be pay-per-view? — David P., Norwalk, Calif. 💬 Answer, via Andrew Marchand: I don’t see it happening in the near future, meaning the next 10 to 15 years. The NFL makes too much money using the present model. There is already pressure from Washington over paid streaming services. Ever? Maybe at some point. Not soon.My wife (and now I) REALLY want to know what is statistically more likely: another baseball hitting the top of another foul pole in regular gameplay, or another photo of a current sports legend and a future sports legend a) being taken when the future legend is a baby and b) the subjects of said photo meeting in a championship (a la Messi/Yamal)? — Matthew J., Fayetteville, N.C.💬 Levi Weaver: Fortunately, Matthew, I think I have a definitive answer: It’s infinitely more likely that we’ll get another legend/baby legend photo, since any athlete can take pictures with babies, and they often do!Specifically: their own babies. Here, I found this one of undefeated boxing champion Laila Ali and her dad, who I’m sure you recognize. Photos almost certainly exist of Bobby and baby Brett Hull, or Archie and baby Peyton/Eli Manning … you get the point. The championship aspect does complicate things. I suppose it’s possible (albeit not probable) that Bronny’s Lakers could meet up with LeBron’s Sixers in the next NBA Finals, but calling Bronny a legend is a stretch.So, combine all the factors — legend + baby legend + championship matchup — and you or I may never see it again. But I still bet it happens before we see another batted ball hit the top of a foul pole in a game.Which league would benefit more from a change in games per season? An increase in NFL, or a decrease in NBA? — Joseph Rowdis, Brooklyn, N.Y.💬 Mike Vorkunov: This might be counterintuitive, but I don’t think the NFL would benefit from more games. I think it risks diluting its product and getting into game fatigue that other leagues suffer from. But I know I might be on an island for that.Still, even as I argue that the NFL wouldn’t benefit from this proposed change, it’s hard to find many people who think the NBA wouldn’t benefit from fewer games.
