OT: Rashard Mendenhall to retire

Submitted by GRBluefan on March 9th, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Dude was a beast at Illinois, and a solid Nfl player. This will likely be more and more common as the truth about safety and post-career health issues becomes apparent. IMO the game of football will look very different 10 years from now.




March 9th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^

Not sure if you can connect the dots between post-career health issues and Menenhall's retirement announcment though.  Six years in the NFL for a RB is more than the average and as stated in the article you linked he had turf-toe that limited his ability to perform.

Power backs like Rashard have a very short shelf life in the NFL which is why they've fallen out of favor as a high draft choice in the past few years.  


March 9th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^

Uhm is this serious or sarcastic? If serious he does have a history. He's had a nasty ACL Tear and Turf Toe have been two big recent injuries. But he's also had a bunch of other smaller injuries that don't get as much news/time as the big two injuries he has had.


March 9th, 2014 at 11:53 AM ^

Good for him. Every interview I've ever heard him do (or like the huffpost article), he seems to be an incredibly bright and self aware person.

Almost seemed like football wasn't a passion, rather something he just kept doing because people kept encouraging him. Our two high schools played in the same conference, and from what info was going around, the main reason he went to Illinois was because they offered his older brother Rashard a scholarship( when no one else would). Signing day interviews may say different, but he was looking out for his brother.

I always respected Rashaad. Walking away from so much money isn't always easy...but I think for him it wasn't that hard a choice.


March 9th, 2014 at 1:08 PM ^

when a mythical figure created by the minds of our government employees gets 'megatroned' to the bottom of the ocean is not a time celebrate... 

I think he made a good point.




atom evolootion

March 9th, 2014 at 3:44 PM ^

should they not have celebrated the towers going down? they believed they were at war, and, to a certain extent, they have been. forces backed by the u.s. government and sometimes u.s. forces have been blowing their stuff up and interfering in their territories for decades. I don't think mendenhall was being an asshole with his comments. he was expressing that we didn't know the man whose death we celebrated. we knew the American portrayal of him. I don't think he would attempt to destroy America ten years after trying to do America and the middle east the favor of getting rid of Saddam for no reason... maybe that's what mendenhall was getting at. no conspiracy. just an ignored half of a dichotomy...

Dilithium Wings

March 9th, 2014 at 5:24 PM ^

We know who they are, they are savages. They celebrated the death of 3 thousand innocent people. Our youth celebrated the death of that man who lead that operation. Our youth who have seen war for 12 years of their lives. Who have seen there friends courageously fight and died in battle. Yeah I see no problem with them cheering that.

atom evolootion

March 9th, 2014 at 6:42 PM ^

most people don't realize that savagery is not limited to the unknown...

I equate savagery with unprovoked viciousness. pearl harbor was an act of savagery. why do we not call Japanese people savages? oh--we like their technology, right? right...

atom evolootion

March 10th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^

I'm happy I live in this country, too. I appreciate your appreciation for my service, especially considering you have absolutely no clue what contributions I bring to the table...

you guys are hilarious to me. I'm not calling Osama a hero. I'm not saying terrorism is the way to go. I'm quite non-violent, myself. I don't believe guns and weapons solve much of anything. but, if you step away from us versus them, and look at both sides objectively, you'll see a certain escalation that began from our side of the fence...

watch Battle for Algiers. the film was made in 1966, but check it out. if you're closed-minded, you're closed-minded. I've been told that people believe how they believe and nothing I say or do can change it. I'd say true, to an extent. the way to equality and peace is through understanding. if you want to label an enemy, at least understand your enemy's motives. it's hard to fight somebody when you don't know why he's pissed at you...

additionally, despite the condescending tone, I still don't see anybody from anywhere saying the u.s. didn't bomb these places or contribute to their bombing for reasons besides retaliation. when I see that, I'll change my stance, which is what most people are unable to do when the subject is this one. even your most extreme patriots can't produce facts that go against the ones I found.