Using "must-win" correctly

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

flexmaster33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
1,515
City & State/Province
Gresham, OR
It drives me nuts this time of year to watch highlights or pick up the newspaper and hear some reporter talking about the Lakers heading into a "must-win" Game 3.

Game 3 is never "must-win" in a best-of-7...that phrase should be reserved only for when a team is going to be officially eliminated if they lose.

Pretty simple math...Lakers lose Game 3 to fall behind 0-3, then reel off four straight...guess Game 3 wasn't a "must-win" then, huh?

pet peeve of mine.
 
I'm of the differing opinion, because I see every game in the playoffs as a must win, so it's useless to say any game is must win. Every loss is one step closer to elimination, so all of them are must win games.
I think we just need to retire the phrase.
 
It's cliche and often, when used, inaccurate. Saying or writing a team in down 2-0 or 3-0 is enough to let the reader know what the losing team is up against.
 
flexmaster33 said:
It drives me nuts this time of year to watch highlights or pick up the newspaper and hear some reporter talking about the Lakers heading into a "must-win" Game 3.

Game 3 is never "must-win" in a best-of-7...that phrase should be reserved only for when a team is going to be officially eliminated if they lose.

Pretty simple math...Lakers lose Game 3 to fall behind 0-3, then reel off four straight...guess Game 3 wasn't a "must-win" then, huh?

pet peeve of mine.

What will sports radio people talk about with this logic in place?
 
I don't think I'd ever really use it. Find more elaborate ways to say it. Maybe if it's in a quote, and then the rest of the quote needs to make up for it.
 
Point of Order said:
But Game 3 is literally a must-win for the Lakers, literally.

Kobe will have to literally explode and carry his team.
 
jlee said:
Point of Order said:
But Game 3 is literally a must-win for the Lakers, literally.

Kobe will have to literally explode and carry his team.

LOL, I don't know about that, but I think Phil Jackson literally just shat himself.
 
Game four is a must-win for the Mavs. Can't let the Lakers back into the series.
 
flexmaster33 said:
It drives me nuts this time of year to watch highlights or pick up the newspaper and hear some reporter talking about the Lakers heading into a "must-win" Game 3.

Game 3 is never "must-win" in a best-of-7...that phrase should be reserved only for when a team is going to be officially eliminated if they lose.

Pretty simple math...Lakers lose Game 3 to fall behind 0-3, then reel off four straight...guess Game 3 wasn't a "must-win" then, huh?

pet peeve of mine.

I would agree with a slight revision. I think a team that is down say 0-2 and is headed home for 2 games is in a must win situation for both of those games. The numbers show that a team that loses on the road and home is destine for trouble. Even 3-1 deficit heading back to you opponents house is a death sentence.
 
It's usually a really-ought-to-win situation. And people write "unanswered" when they mean "uninterrupted."
 
printdust said:
Point of Order said:
But Game 3 is literally a must-win for the Lakers, literally.

Literally: a word that needs to be retired.

If I remember right, some analyst once said a player was "exploding out there, and I mean that literally". I might have the wrong verb, but I know it was completely ridiculous.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top