OT: The wussification of the NFL continues
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6586630 <---- Link
So in maintaining their non-bias, the NFL adds "the Steeler rule" to the Mel Blount rule, the Hines Ward rule, the Ryan Clark rule, and the James Harrison rule.
Goodell is running amok and is fudging up the lockout situation and seriously needs to be fired. He's the worst thing to happen to the NFL in a long, long time. How many years until defenders can't touch QBs at all, and they have flags around their waists? Or until defenders are only allowed to move at half speed?
Seriously, such a joke. This is the NFL, not the Arena League.
EDIT: You can't hit the QB while he's throwing. Um, what? Combined with the "no hitting the WR until he's in the endzone" rule, how are defenders supposed to do their jobs?
Anybody down for some two-hand touch?
PICK ME! PICK ME!
If that's not a Carnac punch line, then it certainly should have been. My favorite that I can recall:
It's a football question, and the answer is "Touchback". <Carnac opens the envelope and reads the question> What should you do if a Dallas Cowboys cheerleader touches you?
*rimshot*
The NFL has a serious concussion problem, and it needs to do something to get players to stop launching at each other helmets-first.
If I don't want to get washed overboard and freeze/drown in the Bering Sea, I won't get on a crab boat.
If I don't want to die in a fiery plane crash, I won't be a pilot.
If I don't want my body to be beat to hell and suffer brain damage, I won't play in the NFL.
It's pretty simple. If you don't want to get your skull smashed in, don't play.
No 22 year old thinks he's going to be an 80 year old man when he's 40, especially when he's one of the greatest athletes on the planet.
Not all paternalism is bad.
If they don't believe it or don't consider it before hand is their fault... Would you walk in to a job potentially dangerous workplace and take a job without considering the risks? They are legal adults and should be accountable to make their own decisions.
because 90% of people think they're above-average drivers and don't properly weigh the risk of getting into a serious accident.
I don't see how this is any different. The NFL is implementing stringent rules to prevent concussions because NFL players aren't properly weighing the risks that they'll end up like Fred McNeill. How is that a bad thing? If hitting people so hard that their brains bruise is an important part of the NFL, then we seriously need to rethink what the NFL is.
crab fishing, mining, military life, airplanes, etc because they're dangerous professions?
pilots, the airline industry, mining companies, and, I'm guessing, crab fishing boats to ensure safety. I don't want to get into the politics surrounding the proper amount of regulation in any given industry, but I think most people would agree that some regulations are appropriate in many professions to protect worker safety. The NFL is now drawing that line at "don't do things that are incredibly likely to cause someone else to get a concussion." I think that's totally reasonable.
To add there doesn't need to be a whiff of politics here either, the NFL is making a business decision. They don't want to become boxing. For all those who consider trying to protect players from concussions "wussification", would you let your son play a sport a sport that probably will shorten their life and seriously effect maintain proper mental welfare leading to things like serious depression or early alzhiemer's? I love football and I always thought I would watch my future son would play, now that he is here I have serious reservations about letting him play the sport. Millions of parents are having those same reservations about the sport as more and more is studied and written about the topic. This is a major dilemma for the NFL, if middle and upper class kids stop playing football then football will eventually lose its perch as the most popular American sport.
So when the military implemented rules regarding a requirement for helmets with better impact testing, or when it instituted more safety rules on a rifle rage, does that mean it was "wussifying?" The prevention of traumatic brain injuries in people who live to entertain us is more important than our uproar about how we can't grunt and eat red meat with our bare hands while saying manly things.
all of the things you listed are service industries for essential goods while football is entertainment. totally apples to apples comparison, well done.
I love it when very cerebral points get rated as "flamebait" simply because they destroy a faulty argument. Unfortunately, my "insightful" rating didn't counteract the ignorance.
Obviously, the argument is ridiculous. If I get carpal tunnel from typing on my computer all day at work, does that mean I have consented to the risk and thus should not be treated specially for the injury? If that was true, there would be no workers compensation for anyone except in extreme circumstances. Its funny that this argument is coming from a poster who appears to be from PA, one of the fathers of current workers compensation legislation.
And if you can't or don't want the risk in whatever job it is, don't take the job. It's very simple. We're all adults, we live in a free society, and if you don't want X happening to you because of said job, either don't take the position or retire early. Very simple.
" if you can't or don't want the risk in whatever job it is, don't take the job"
This is about reducing the risk of the job. Every job carries inherent risks; those risks that are absolute musts. Head-to-head contact is not a necessary component of football. Being speared in the neck is not a necessary component.
Hits altogether are being removed. You cannot hit someone while they're throwing or catching a ball. How is that football? You're playing gym-class flag ball at that point. May as well play offense-only or 7-on-7.
Defenseless players cannot be hit in the head or neck area with the helmet, face mask, forearm or shoulder.
You can still hit them in the chest, back, legs, etc.
Live stupid, die young, leave a decrepit corpse.
I actually do, I think we should seriously consider outlawing being an airplane as a profession.
Actually the airline industry has one of the best safety records of any industry. You are much safer in an airplane than a car. As for the other professions, I mostly defer to the comments above, but would like to add that for the most part those professions are much more important than professional football.
And seatbelt laws (except as applied to those under 18) are an insult and should be abolished everywhere.
Howeva, I think the NFL is different, and generally speaking trying to protect the athletes is admirable on their part. But the bottom line is, at some point guys still are going to get seriously hurt, and where do you draw the line?
I have no issue with penalizing hits that appear to have the intent of injuring an opposing player, I am wondering about where you draw the line. There is a psychological aspect of laying the wood, so to speak, on a ball carrier, or driving EXTRA hard to pancake a defensive lineman. You cannot rule out legitimate hard hits. The issue is the line between what constitutes a fair and an illegal hit is getting (and will contiue to get) blurrier and will hurt the game.
As long as there are collisions people will inevitably sustain injuries, period. Curbing dirty play can help, but ultimately I think it will come down to helmet technology, better understanding concussions (including recent research that suggests its the "glancing blows" that typically cause them), and truly getting team doctors/coaches/players on board with properly treating head injuries and letting them heal.
Hard hits don't have to be hits to the head, which are the plays most people are concerned about. The league doesn't have any rules against hard hits, but using your helmet to blast another player in the head should be illegal.
[NOTE: I am aware of the BS penalties against Suh last season, those should not have been called, and were tough clean plays.]
I agree that helmet to helmet hits should be avoided and discouraged, but aren't altogether avoidable. I think specifically coaching against that would drastically help. I am sure no coach ever teaches leading with your head into another player's head, but I would imagine tackling at that level is so instinctual it will take time, effort, and practice to re-learn proper technique for some.
If they don't believe it or don't consider it before hand is their fault... Would you walk in to a job potentially dangerous workplace and take a job without considering the risks? They are legal adults and should be accountable to make their own decisions.
You probably don't come from a place where you only have two options: ball or bang.
Maybe I'm confused, but I thought "ball" and "bang" meant the same thing.
Banging is selling.
For the most part everybody wants to get out. There are basically two ways. Bang or ball, and if you're a baller and you keep your muth shut you won't have to deal with too much shit.
If you can get out because you are a baller nobody will really fuck with you because they want to be able to say "Hey, I grew up with Telfair (whoever)." And if you can get out because you can ball everybody knows who you are.
That might not be how it used to be, but for the most part that's how it goes now.
While this is doubtlessly true for some, I'd hesitate in saying it's true for even a majority of NFL players.
You can think whatever you want. I doubt you've lived it.
The life of every player in the NFL? No, I have not.
We can agree that Santonio Holmes and Eli Manning likely had different backgrounds without getting into dick-measuring contests over who had a harder-luck upbringing, however.
You're not honestly trying to say that "most" players in the NFL came from a household like the Manning household are you?
Edit: I believe you used the word "majority" which in my mind is synonymous with "most," but I know how you are a stickler for accuracy and all. HALOL.
It's an example. I'm just saying that I'm sure a large number of NFL players were not faced with the "deal drugs or play basketball/football" dilemma you're painting.
I'm sure Matt Stafford didn't. I'm sure that Jahvid Best, from a suburb of San Fran didn't. I'm even sure that Megatron, from small-town Georgia probably didn't.
I'm just saying that while I'm sure a number of guys grew up in the situation you describe, I don't think that the dilemma you described explains why a huge number of these guys are playing.
And you ended up graduating from Michigan, not banging, I don't think you can say you've lived it either.
I was just trying to make a joke about how both "balling" and "banging" are slang terms for having sexual intercourse.
I may be a middle class white guy, but even I know the immortal words of Biggums Smallsberg (aka Biggie Smalls), "either you're slingin' crack rock or you got a wicked jump shot." (Things Done Changed). Different sport, I know, but same sentiment.
since you are (I'm sure) wiser than these players you are tyying to protect.
The League they're all a part of is. Which in turn, also probably knows more than you or I.
Same idea as protecting the QB...The league (as is the case with all sports leagues) is dependent on the talent playing...if it becomes too dangerous and your top players can't take the field, how will the product look?
and probably THE point. Most of us can remember feeling immortal, indestructible and perhaps oblivious. While I don't personally know anyone who played professional football, a friend's brother was an all pro for several years and for the past twenty years (he is now about 70) could barely walk. These guys get the living daylights knocked out of them, and I hope the union does manage to get lifetime health benefits for everyone who plays the game.
are different than the issue at hand. Which is, where do you draw the line(s) between player protections, keeping the (let's face it) violent appeal of the game intact, and making a decision that these guys are aware of the risks, and are responsible, in the end, for their own future welfare.
that they're not properly assessing the risks. Optimism bias is a real, powerful thing, and humans are fucking terrible at assessing risk.
that are more qualified to assess the risks? Oh, the people who are in charge, or who want to be. I see. As for me, I think that Goodell and others that would put their judgements above the guys that play the game are just as prone to bias or mistakes.
Goodell is certainly capable of making mistakes, but if he makes a mistake here it's in the direction of being too careful, which is probably better for player welfare than being mistaken in the direction of being too reckless.
it is beside my point. Which is why does someone in charge have more responsibility for my safety, and have the right to dictate how "safe" I am, than I do? This is why I hate seat belt laws (which I personally follow, FWIW). If I want to be reckless (in another oerson's opinion) with my safety, that is my right, not the right of an unelected wise man who can decide what is good for me, since I may have "positive bias" and not know what actually is best for me.
I actually have less of a problem with the NFL than with a seatbelt law however. In the NFL, they are trying to restrict someone else doing something that may harm me. With a seatbelt law, if I don't wear one no one is hurt but me.
...but multpile concussions don't have to be mandatory for NFL players. I think I would rather see them play with no helmets, no spikes, and no pads. Padding and helmets reduce immediate pain, but all of that force has to go somewhere, so it goes into the body. Let people get immediate feedback that it hurts when they run into someone at full speed, so that they aren't as likely to do it that way in the future.
Football can still be plenty tough without causing an average lifespan under 50 years old..
is people who wouldn't last one moderate hit in the NFL bitching about the wussification of a sport that leads to serious/major/deadly injuries yearly
said.
I am not a trained athlete. I haven't played in the NFL and trained for that PROFESSIONAL CAREER, so because I can't do the things these people do I can't have an opinion on it?
OK, guess I can only have an opinion on English, History, and Teaching. If I ever see someone complain about or have an opinion on something they don't do as a profession or job then I guess I'll have to report them.
He is not saying you can't have an opinion. It seems he thinks your opinion is unreasonable, ill-informed, or just stupid.
These guys are taking powerful hits at speeds beyond normal levels. Football commands so much money that these guys are trained to be brutal warriors. There is a reason NFL offensive linemen have much shorter life-spans than non-NFL individuals. The sport is tough. The evolution of the game has led to more physical play that needs to be curtailed. For example, hockey: players and goalies didn't used to wear helmets because the game was slower, less physical, and less complicated. Imagine not wearing a helmet now. I read an article on the effects of blows to the head on football players (it was either Newsweek or National Geographic) that was really interesting just the amount of dangerous hits to the head players take (I believe it was a college player they were monitoring).
The Steelers play tough, but that can be dirty. Also, BR is a pig and regardless of the dismissal, he still could have raped the girl. Those "he v. she said" cases are difficult to bring to court, especially when one's bodyguard refuses to allow her friends to join her in the bathroom.
perhaps i could make an analogy.
"Use of starving, pissed off lions adds to the wussification of gladiatorial combat!"
slake your blood lust elsewhere, football has a lot more going for it than dudes crushing each other.