Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

         Yes...it was only a dreary exhibition game between the Cowboys and Dolphins last night. But, wasn't it great to have football...any football ...back again! After this crazy off-season for the Pats, thank God! Nonetheless, with political correctness and a blizzard of concussion lawsuits intruding onto this wonderful sport, one has to wonder whether the National Football League really stands for "Not For Long".

         I have heard where one commentator compared pro football to dog fighting. Commissioner Roger Goodell keeps pushing through rule changes which, though allegedly are designed to increase player safety. But, the true purpose for such rules are the establishment of a defense to the aforementioned lawsuits. 

         As a result, the quality of the sport we love is gradually deteriorating, in incremental fashion. Too much power to decide games is being placed in the sole discretion hands of already incompetent referees. For example, can any of you tell me what constitutes a legal hit on a QB? Can any of you tell me when a WR is deemed "defenseless"? Are RBs who get savaged yearly going to take more punishment, now that they are outlawed from lowering their heads in the open field, upon contact?

         College football has instituted a rule whereby a player who makes what an official considers to be an illegal blow to the head, gets tossed out! The rule has been referred as as the "when in doubt, throw him out, rule! 

         Will two-hand touch football soon be replacing the game that we have known all of our lives, and grown to love?     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

     

    Quite the opposite actually. Goodell is smart to keep football from going the way of boxing. Concussions and the long-term damange they can cause are nothing to make light of, and the league is doing exactly what it should do to try to limit them and the brain damange they can cause. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sam-Adams. Show Sam-Adams's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?


    Mordern medicine is telling us things have to change if you want to try and keep players safe. It sucks to see the refs have so much freedom of interpretation but if they don't players are going to get hurt.

    I have to think some of this has to be placed on the colege/high school level coaching. It used to be a good tackle was when you made solid contact at the hips and wrap the players thighs and knees to take him down. Somewhere in time (maybe the 90's) it seemed like that went away and the new thing to do to make sportscenter was to "blow people up" by timing contact when the player touches the ball.

    What frustrates me are rules that are put in place for ratings and not player safety. Illegal contact downfield to recievers has to go away, Polian is gone and this rule should have gone with him. Too many times (Pats included) are teams taking that shot for the flag on 3rd down desparation plays and getting it.

    How about f-ing fake injuries? How bogus was it last year when the Pats went into hyper speed and players layed on the field to slow it down? I say if you delay the game due to injury you sit out that series......not one play!

    Maybe we should go the other way Tex, make steroids legal and even encourage it? Remove the penalties that protect players and let them go. Have them all sign waivers that the league owes them nothing upon injury and they all need to prove they have healthcare insurance to take the field. Then we'll see some collisions, people watch hockey for the fights and nascar for the wrecks right?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from LittleTimmy31. Show LittleTimmy31's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    As a former college player who has had my bell rung once or twice before, if they truly want to limit/eliminate incidents with 'leading with the head' hits and tackles, remove helmets completely from the game, like in rugby. Otherwise, all these rule changes is a bunch of bs. It's not going to work.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    Quite the opposite actually. Goodell is smart to keep football from going the way of boxing. Concussions and the long-term damange they can cause are nothing to make light of, and the league is doing exactly what it should do to try to limit them and the brain damange they can cause. 

     

    [QUOTE]

    Boxing lost its way because of a number of factors, including money and greed. That and MMA which is just more entertaining. I don't think it had anything to do with violence or concussions or anything of the sort. If that was the case, how would you explain the popularity of MMA which is exponentially more violent?

    This safety crap in football is about lawsuits and liability and also trying to head off whatever laws some grandstanding politicians might try to pass.  It's about self-interest, they don't care about concussions other than image and what they might cost to deal with.

    Football is not a better game with all these new rules. If someone doesn't want to risk getting bopped in the noggin, they don't need to play. And if they choose to take that risk, that's on them. Nobody's forcing anybody to do anything they don't want to.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    Incompetent referees? Yes, you could do their jobs so much better. You do get all the calls right while you're sitting behind your keyboard watching 15 slow motion replays. Texas dork.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Quite the opposite actually. Goodell is smart to keep football from going the way of boxing. Concussions and the long-term damange they can cause are nothing to make light of, and the league is doing exactly what it should do to try to limit them and the brain damange they can cause. 



         Quite the contrary? What are you talking about? Who is making light of concussions? Contact is what makes football, football. No matter how many rules are passed, you can't legislate it out of the game. If this is done...then you'll reduce the NFL to a two-hand touch league. Who is going to watch that?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:

    Incompetent referees? Yes, you could do their jobs so much better. You do get all the calls right while you're sitting behind your keyboard watching 15 slow motion replays. Texas dork.



         Do you even watch football? If you did, then you wouldn't post stupid things like this. Full time, trained officials are a must.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Quite the opposite actually. Goodell is smart to keep football from going the way of boxing. Concussions and the long-term damange they can cause are nothing to make light of, and the league is doing exactly what it should do to try to limit them and the brain damange they can cause. 

     



         Quite the contrary? What are you talking about? Who is making light of concussions? Contact is what makes football, football. No matter how many rules are passed, you can't legislate it out of the game. If this is done...then you'll reduce the NFL to a two-hand touch league. Who is going to watch that?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Have ratings declined? I guess I missed that story.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:



    Have ratings declined? I guess I missed that story.

    RESPONSE: Prolate, let's get real. What can be done to ensure that the game will be made safe, so that no other player will ever suffer a concussion? 




     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    Nothing can make it perfectly safe, but that doesn't mean nothing can be done to make it safer . . . or that making it safer is the wrong thing to do.  Working in mines will never be 100% safe either, but that doesn't mean that mining companies shouldn't make that work as safe as possible. 

     

    The fact is, preventing brain injury makes both economic and ethical sense for pro football.  This is a sport that thrives on having a huge, mainstream audience; and getting a reputation as a sport that leaves its players permanently damaged won't help maintain that audience.  Goodell knows this and is acting both ethically and in the long-term economic interest of the sport in trying to limit the number and impact of concussions suffered by players. 

     

    This is an absolute non-story, if you ask me.  Goodell is doing exactly what he should be doing and it's strengthening, not weakening, the sport. 

     

     

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Nothing can make it perfectly safe, but that doesn't mean nothing can be done to make it safer . . . or that making it safer is the wrong thing to do.  Working in mines will never be 100% safe either, but that doesn't mean that mining companies shouldn't make that work as safe as possible. 

    RESPONSE: Fine. What further safety changes, if any, do you suggest? 

    The fact is, preventing brain injury makes both economic and ethical sense for pro football.  This is a sport that thrives on having a huge, mainstream audience; and getting a reputation as a sport that leaves its players permanently damaged won't help maintain that audience.  Goodell knows this and is acting both ethically and in the long-term economic interest of the sport in trying to limit the number and impact of concussions suffered by players. 

     

    RESPONSE: So...you don't think that Goodell's actions in this area are in any way related to the multiple number of concussion lawsuits? 

     

    This is an absolute non-story, if you ask me.  Goodell is doing exactly what he should be doing and it's strengthening, not weakening, the sport. 

     

    RESPONSE: A non-story? You don't believe that there are some folks out there who want to see the game of football as we know it banned? 

     

     




     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from tanbass. Show tanbass's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

    RESPONSE: A non-story? You don't believe that there are some folks out there who want to see the game of football as we know it banned? 

     



    Is there anything left in this world that some jack-a$$ doesn't want "banned"? I wish anyone luck in trying to ban the NFL....

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to tanbass' comment:

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is there anything left in this world that some jack-a$$ doesn't want "banned"? I wish anyone luck in trying to ban the NFL....

    RESPONSE: Hope you're right, my friend. It won't happen suddenly, but incrementally. Rest assured that the proponents of banning the game will keep working at it.




     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Nothing can make it perfectly safe, but that doesn't mean nothing can be done to make it safer . . . or that making it safer is the wrong thing to do.  Working in mines will never be 100% safe either, but that doesn't mean that mining companies shouldn't make that work as safe as possible. 

    RESPONSE: Fine. What further safety changes, if any, do you suggest? 

    The fact is, preventing brain injury makes both economic and ethical sense for pro football.  This is a sport that thrives on having a huge, mainstream audience; and getting a reputation as a sport that leaves its players permanently damaged won't help maintain that audience.  Goodell knows this and is acting both ethically and in the long-term economic interest of the sport in trying to limit the number and impact of concussions suffered by players. 

     

    RESPONSE: So...you don't think that Goodell's actions in this area are in any way related to the multiple number of concussion lawsuits? 

     

    This is an absolute non-story, if you ask me.  Goodell is doing exactly what he should be doing and it's strengthening, not weakening, the sport. 

     

    RESPONSE: A non-story? You don't believe that there are some folks out there who want to see the game of football as we know it banned? 

     

     




     

    [/QUOTE]


    1.
    I'm not a doctor or safety expert.  Are you? Normally I leave those types of decisions to qualified professionals.

    2.

    Sure, potential lawsuits are part of the economic calculation.  So what?

    3.

    I think the game is as entertaining as ever. Attendence and viewership figures suggest most people agree.  Until ratings plummet it's a non-story.

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Great to Have Football Back...But For How Long?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Nothing can make it perfectly safe, but that doesn't mean nothing can be done to make it safer . . . or that making it safer is the wrong thing to do.  Working in mines will never be 100% safe either, but that doesn't mean that mining companies shouldn't make that work as safe as possible. 

    RESPONSE: Fine. What further safety changes, if any, do you suggest? 

    The fact is, preventing brain injury makes both economic and ethical sense for pro football.  This is a sport that thrives on having a huge, mainstream audience; and getting a reputation as a sport that leaves its players permanently damaged won't help maintain that audience.  Goodell knows this and is acting both ethically and in the long-term economic interest of the sport in trying to limit the number and impact of concussions suffered by players. 

     

    RESPONSE: So...you don't think that Goodell's actions in this area are in any way related to the multiple number of concussion lawsuits? 

     

    This is an absolute non-story, if you ask me.  Goodell is doing exactly what he should be doing and it's strengthening, not weakening, the sport. 

     

    RESPONSE: A non-story? You don't believe that there are some folks out there who want to see the game of football as we know it banned? 

     

     1.
    I'm not a doctor or safety expert.  Are you? Normally I leave those types of decisions to qualified professionals.

     

    RESPONSE: My my...how defensive we're getting? LOL!! So...you have no opinion as to any further safety changes that should be incorporated?? 

    2.

    Sure, potential lawsuits are part of the economic calculation.  So what?

    RESPONSE: How large a part would you say, in terms of percentage? 20%? 50%, 75%? Thi is not a trick question...I merely an seeking your opinion.

    3.

    I think the game is as entertaining as ever. Attendence and viewership figures suggest most people agree.  Until ratings plummet it's a non-story.

    RESPONSE:A non-reply. Let me rephrase...I asked whether you believe that there are some people out there who are working to see the game eventually get banned?  




     

Share