Football needs to be less violent

harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Football needs to be less violent

I am not a football fan nor a sports fan by any means, shape, form or fashion. But what do you sports fans think of this ?

Does football need to be more safer ? Is the current standards of the industry not safe enough ?

http://news.msn.com/pop-culture/obama-says-football-should-be-less-violent

 

Obama says football should be less violent

President Barack Obama said he loves football but thinks the sport should "probably change gradually" so there are fewer concussions, particularly at the college level.

"I'm a big football fan, but I have to tell you if I had a son, I'd have to think long and hard before I let him play football," Obama said in a wide-ranging interview with The New Republic magazine published online early Sunday.

Football is America's most popular televised sport, an industry worth $9 billion a year. But in recent years, suicides by brain-injured players and lawsuits from their families have raised concerns about the impact of repeated concussions.

MSN Sports: Junior Seau's family sues league over brain injuries

In the interview, Obama was asked how he squares his love of the game with rising awareness of the impact of repeated head injuries on football players.

"I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence," Obama said.

(Rest of the article can be found at the link)

 

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I don't like football, but

I don't like football, but the same question can be applied to hockey.
When I think back, the UFC got big in Canada right around the same time the NHL pussified hockey by a degree or two. Take that into consideration with recent archaeological findings which suggest we killed all our closest relatives because we were better at violence and my conclusion is that violence is, was, and will forever be: entertaining.

Take the violence out of a sport and you lose fans and money.

The players get enough to pay for their expenses as well as retire at 40. As long as they want that kind of money, they need to deliver the entertainment.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 Agree with Vastet 100%. I

 Agree with Vastet 100%. I think the quality of football has already suffered due to the more stringent rules on tackling a QB. I understand a desire to try to avoid injuries that can be avoided, but the reality is that when you have a game based on the idea of athletic freaks of nature running into each other, injuries are inevitable. I don't think that players should be able to sue because of their medical issues after they retire. Any idiot can tell that subjecting your body to those kinds of abuses will probably lead to medical issues in the future. They know that going in when they decide to become football players. 

 

I can understand why a parent might not want their children to play football. If you think it is too risky for your child, fine, who am I to tell you otherwise. However, I don't see why some people see a need to change the game for those who do want to play it. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
I am with you guys

I am with you guys on this one.

I like boxing (am not the rabid fan that I used to be) and really don't see how that sport could be made any safer, unless you were going to make it to the point that it was no longer boxing.

I can understand not wanting your kid to box say, but like Beyond just pointed out, why change the game for those that want to ?

I will say this, when this article hit the local newspaper that I got online, the comments area was in total outrage. People DO love their football.

I only watch the Superbowl for the commercials and to see the pom-pom girls. Other than that, I am just not that interested. Smiling

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I am going to be flat out

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
American football has become

American football has become less violent since the 70's when I grew up watching stuff like head hits, clothes line tackles, roll tackles and late hits. The sport is still deadly violent in the hands of the wrong player, but for the most part, it is 10x less violent.

It would be cool to see no more head hits, but how are you going to eliminate it? I say get rid of the pads. I mean, every thing. No helmet. No shoulder pads.

See the reason why those pads exist is because when this sport first started out they had some pussies who wore the padded helmet and under-shirt shields. Then as the sport grew in the 50's the helmets went to plastic. After this, every thing went out of control.

No pads. No helmets. End massive injuries.

Look at Australian Football or Rugby? Look at the injuries in those games? Yeah, they do get injured but you don't have near the damage to the skull/brain as you do in the NFL.

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

 Yeah, they do get injured but you don't have near the damage to the skull/brain as you do in the NFL.

 

Interestingly enough, I came across an article in Rolling Stone Magazine (don't know if it is online or not, probably is) but it talked about the same types of brain damage that boxers can get (I forget the medical term, but everyone has used the term, punchdrunk) was more common among football players than doctors realized for a bunch of years.

The reason that it had gone undetected until after the cause of death in most cases, was because that it was hard to spot under ordinary scans and stuff.

I really don't know what the long term implications of these findings will be.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

American football has become less violent since the 70's when I grew up watching stuff like head hits, clothes line tackles, roll tackles and late hits. The sport is still deadly violent in the hands of the wrong player, but for the most part, it is 10x less violent.

It would be cool to see no more head hits, but how are you going to eliminate it? I say get rid of the pads. I mean, every thing. No helmet. No shoulder pads.

See the reason why those pads exist is because when this sport first started out they had some pussies who wore the padded helmet and under-shirt shields. Then as the sport grew in the 50's the helmets went to plastic. After this, every thing went out of control.

No pads. No helmets.  

I didn't know about all of that.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I am going to

Brian37 wrote:

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

American football has become less violent since the 70's when I grew up watching stuff like head hits, clothes line tackles, roll tackles and late hits. The sport is still deadly violent in the hands of the wrong player, but for the most part, it is 10x less violent.

It would be cool to see no more head hits, but how are you going to eliminate it? I say get rid of the pads. I mean, every thing. No helmet. No shoulder pads.

See the reason why those pads exist is because when this sport first started out they had some pussies who wore the padded helmet and under-shirt shields. Then as the sport grew in the 50's the helmets went to plastic. After this, every thing went out of control.

No pads. No helmets.  

I didn't know about all of that.

If you look at the history of the professional football in the USA, you can see old game films of the early league play. It was much less violent and head injuries were rare. Players tackled other players, they did not HIT the other player.

As pads became thicker and harder, players were convinced that they could hit harder, but this is bullshit. Having played rugby, football and soccer, I'd have to say that reducing the pads (or removing them) will greatly reduce the number of injuries. If they still want to wear helmets then get them a different helmet which isn't so hard. I'd go back to a soft leather or poly mesh helmet.

Of course, politics in America will interfere, the makers of the current pads and helmets will only care about their profits over the safety of other humans. They will get lobbyists to go and speak with the NFL if this idea ever started to get any traction.

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

DAMN !!!  :D   Laughing out loud

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:If you

digitalbeachbum wrote:

If you look at the history of the professional football in the USA, you can see old game films of the early league play. It was much less violent and head injuries were rare. Players tackled other players, they did not HIT the other player.

As pads became thicker and harder, players were convinced that they could hit harder, but this is bullshit. Having played rugby, football and soccer, I'd have to say that reducing the pads (or removing them) will greatly reduce the number of injuries. If they still want to wear helmets then get them a different helmet which isn't so hard. I'd go back to a soft leather or poly mesh helmet.

 

That's interesting. I too, would have thought that more padding would have made it safer.

I guess because it SOUNDS safer, but I hadn't factored the idea that people would try to hit and play harder, falsely assuming that the extra padding would be safe.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

If you look at the history of the professional football in the USA, you can see old game films of the early league play. It was much less violent and head injuries were rare. Players tackled other players, they did not HIT the other player.

As pads became thicker and harder, players were convinced that they could hit harder, but this is bullshit. Having played rugby, football and soccer, I'd have to say that reducing the pads (or removing them) will greatly reduce the number of injuries. If they still want to wear helmets then get them a different helmet which isn't so hard. I'd go back to a soft leather or poly mesh helmet.

 

That's interesting. I too, would have thought that more padding would have made it safer.

I guess because it SOUNDS safer, but I hadn't factored the idea that people would try to hit and play harder, falsely assuming that the extra padding would be safe.

It's only an illusion. Think about this: If you were in a car going 90 mph you'd be ok with it on the highway. Now remove all the steel surrounding you and the windows. All you have is the sub frame with the wheels, engine and the minor interior (seats and steering wheel).

How would it make you feel? Would you be more aware that 90mph is too fast? What if several other cars are around you?

I feel that OLD people.. I mean the people who shouldn't be driving at all, get inside this huge Cadillacs and forget what is going on outside the car. Some of them can't even see over the steering wheel.

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I'll expand and say boxing

I'll expand and say boxing is a lot more dangerous with gloves. Take 'em off, few to no head shots. Noone wants to break their hand on someones skull.
With gloves, 10x the injuries to the head, very few to the hand.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Now that you guys have

Now that you guys have pointed that out it makes perfect sense.

For instance 50 miles an hour feels much faster when your on two-wheels vs. a vehicle.

A bare knuckle punch may hurt a whole lot more to the receiver, but it also hurts the persons hand  a lot more.

I had never really thought about it like that.

But now, these analogies make perfect sense.

The less likely that one feels they are going to get hurt, the MORE aggressive they are going to be.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

Unlike you I accept the reality of duality. You think life is a script. I also don't like how some animals are treated but still eat their meat. Life isn't all peaches and cream like you want to make it out to be.

Change your nick to "Bubble Boy" it would suit you better.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 You are assuming that the

 You are assuming that the fear of injury would slow a football player down. I don't think that is a safe assumption, we have all seen football players go out on the field with injuries that would have us normal people laid up in bed. Winning is everything to them and they are not going to slow down.

The game has changed a lot since the 50's. In the 50's players earned an average of $6,000 per year and except for the stars who took a bulk of the pay, many players had second jobs. Football was more of a hobby than a career for most. So of course the people who played didn't take it as seriously, were not athletes who devoted their lives to being physically fit and wanted to avoid injury. Yet even then, skull fractures were a common problem (which is why they started using the hard helmet). 

Today, even the minimum salary for an NFL player is over 10 times the salary of an average American. People prepare to join the NFL their entire lives and are willing to put their bodies at risk for the mere chance of being in the draft. Those players who are exceptionally good at winning can not only have a great career in the NFL, but gain fame that can propel their careers long after they retire. Players train much harder, are in better physical shape and are generally not at all comparable to the players before 1950.

You get players like Nick Sundberg playing with a fucking broken arm, Adrian Peterson tore both his ACL and MCL comes back and plays phenomenally the next season, Peyton Manning certainly could have retired due to his neck injury- he has more than enough money and without playing another game would be put in the Hall of Fame as one of the greatest QB's of all time, yet there he was on the field. These guys are not afraid of injury, remove the helmets and all you get is a lot more people with fractured skulls. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

Unlike you I accept the reality of duality. You think life is a script. I also don't like how some animals are treated but still eat their meat. Life isn't all peaches and cream like you want to make it out to be.

Change your nick to "Bubble Boy" it would suit you better.

Just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy, you blame the owners of football teams when you are just as guilty at encouraging NFL players to play. Without the viewer, there is no money in football, without money no football owner would sink money into buying teams.

Unlike you I accept reality. The reality is that football is a violent game, I enjoy watching violent games and so I accept that other people are putting their bodies at risk for my enjoyment. I don't blame anyone else for it. You are obsessed with blaming everyone else and apparently incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
It's exactly the same with

It's exactly the same with hockey. 60 years ago there wasn't a fraction of the money in the NHL as there is now. Mario Lemieux should've retired 10 years before he did.

Wayne Gretzky still makes money from commercials today. He was so successful that his family can also make fame related money.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

Unlike you I accept the reality of duality. You think life is a script. I also don't like how some animals are treated but still eat their meat. Life isn't all peaches and cream like you want to make it out to be.

Change your nick to "Bubble Boy" it would suit you better.

Just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy, you blame the owners of football teams when you are just as guilty at encouraging NFL players to play. Without the viewer, there is no money in football, without money no football owner would sink money into buying teams.

Unlike you I accept reality. The reality is that football is a violent game, I enjoy watching violent games and so I accept that other people are putting their bodies at risk for my enjoyment. I don't blame anyone else for it. You are obsessed with blaming everyone else and apparently incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions. 

No, once again, the difference between you and me is that I accept the pluralism of reality even within myself. You on the other hand smoke the same utopia crap script thinking on par with religion, your drug of choice is economics.

I don't hate the private sector. I cant live without it. I am typing on a fucking computer which a business had to make. I have been bragging in another thread about a band that sold 350,000,000 albums for the past 30+ years.

The only difference is that I think the top can do better for all of us than they have been.

Oh shit and now I am going to quote a movie that has made billions.

"Take care of yourself Han, I guess that's what your best at".

I don't think you are ever going to get it Bubble Boy. I only hope for you someday you do. BUBBLE BOY.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

Unlike you I accept the reality of duality. You think life is a script. I also don't like how some animals are treated but still eat their meat. Life isn't all peaches and cream like you want to make it out to be.

Change your nick to "Bubble Boy" it would suit you better.

Just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy, you blame the owners of football teams when you are just as guilty at encouraging NFL players to play. Without the viewer, there is no money in football, without money no football owner would sink money into buying teams.

Unlike you I accept reality. The reality is that football is a violent game, I enjoy watching violent games and so I accept that other people are putting their bodies at risk for my enjoyment. I don't blame anyone else for it. You are obsessed with blaming everyone else and apparently incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions. 

No, once again, the difference between you and me is that I accept the pluralism of reality even within myself. You on the other hand smoke the same utopia crap script thinking on par with religion, your drug of choice is economics.

I don't hate the private sector. I cant live without it. I am typing on a fucking computer which a business had to make. I have been bragging in another thread about a band that sold 350,000,000 albums for the past 30+ years.

The only difference is that I think the top can do better for all of us than they have been.

Oh shit and now I am going to quote a movie that has made billions.

"Take care of yourself Han, I guess that's what your best at".

I don't think you are ever going to get it Bubble Boy. I only hope for you someday you do. BUBBLE BOY.

Then why was the first thing you did in this thread was blame the owners of the football teams? All you are doing is attempting to pass off the blame so in some sick twisted way, when you see RG3 take a devastating blow it is someone else who bears the responsibility and you can sit there and have your enjoyment guilt free. Ultimately, the people who are most responsible for the violence in football is the fans.

If the owners could get away with staging games like the WWE stages fights and pay actors $100k a year to play soft and still get the same number of viewers, they would- it would mean larger profits for them. Owners don't like injuries if for no other reason than injuries cost them a shitload of cash. It is the fans who want to see the big hits, the dramatic stories and the dangers inherent in full speed football. And you sir, are one of them. There is a reason you watch football and not curling. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I am going to be flat out blunt. IF IF IF IF the owners of pro sports actually cared about the players, those games really should not exist. These guys are not the military on D-Day, nor do they get paid enough. Most in pro sports have been abusing their bodies long before they get to the pros and once they do their careers are short, and after they leave they end up with nothing an a lifetime of health problems. No different than greyhounds and horse racing.

 

Having said that, people are going to do what they do and sports are not going away, so I do hope they can make it safer and I am a fan also.

 

If you cared about the players you wouldn't watch it and therefore provide the financial support for such barbarism. Obviously, you are a selfish uncaring lout who has no problem exploiting poor football players for nothing other than your own entertainment. 

Unlike you I accept the reality of duality. You think life is a script. I also don't like how some animals are treated but still eat their meat. Life isn't all peaches and cream like you want to make it out to be.

Change your nick to "Bubble Boy" it would suit you better.

Just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy, you blame the owners of football teams when you are just as guilty at encouraging NFL players to play. Without the viewer, there is no money in football, without money no football owner would sink money into buying teams.

Unlike you I accept reality. The reality is that football is a violent game, I enjoy watching violent games and so I accept that other people are putting their bodies at risk for my enjoyment. I don't blame anyone else for it. You are obsessed with blaming everyone else and apparently incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions. 

No, once again, the difference between you and me is that I accept the pluralism of reality even within myself. You on the other hand smoke the same utopia crap script thinking on par with religion, your drug of choice is economics.

I don't hate the private sector. I cant live without it. I am typing on a fucking computer which a business had to make. I have been bragging in another thread about a band that sold 350,000,000 albums for the past 30+ years.

The only difference is that I think the top can do better for all of us than they have been.

Oh shit and now I am going to quote a movie that has made billions.

"Take care of yourself Han, I guess that's what your best at".

I don't think you are ever going to get it Bubble Boy. I only hope for you someday you do. BUBBLE BOY.

Then why was the first thing you did in this thread was blame the owners of the football teams? All you are doing is attempting to pass off the blame so in some sick twisted way, when you see RG3 take a devastating blow it is someone else who bears the responsibility and you can sit there and have your enjoyment guilt free. Ultimately, the people who are most responsible for the violence in football is the fans.

If the owners could get away with staging games like the WWE stages fights and pay actors $100k a year to play soft and still get the same number of viewers, they would- it would mean larger profits for them. Owners don't like injuries if for no other reason than injuries cost them a shitload of cash. It is the fans who want to see the big hits, the dramatic stories and the dangers inherent in full speed football. And you sir, are one of them. There is a reason you watch football and not curling. 

You are never going to get it. Bubble Boy.

For the A D D aflicted

 

There is a difference between what I want, and what reality is. I live in reality. If I cut off everyone I disagreed with or stopped associating with things or people who do things I didn't like, I would have to live on an island.

 

You live on an island. You smoke the same crack called "utopia" and project yourself on everyone else, yet are too dense to see it. Same poison, different drug.

Keep it up Bubble Boy.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  Pro football is just too

  Pro football is just too violent.   I blame video games and the NRA.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  Pro

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Pro football is just too violent.   I blame video games and the NRA.

Laughing out loud

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  Pro

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Pro football is just too violent.   I blame video games and the NRA.

No... it's video games and Hollywood!


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  Pro

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Pro football is just too violent.   I blame video games and the NRA.

Fuck you Prozac, I think you just caused a tear in my abdominal muscles. I will send you the bill. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  Pro

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Pro football is just too violent.   I blame video games and the NRA.

lulz. You forgot Elvis.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:You are never

Brian37 wrote:

You are never going to get it. Bubble Boy.

For the A D D aflicted

 

There is a difference between what I want, and what reality is. I live in reality. If I cut off everyone I disagreed with or stopped associating with things or people who do things I didn't like, I would have to live on an island.

 

You live on an island. You smoke the same crack called "utopia" and project yourself on everyone else, yet are too dense to see it. Same poison, different drug.

Keep it up Bubble Boy.

Well obviously I am just a lot more agreeable than you, because if someone or some company does something I think is morally wrong I do avoid doing business with them. Yet somehow, I find plenty of people to do business with. Of course, my morals are admittedly very loose because for the most part I believe morality is overrated. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3929
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
I don't care for the culture

I don't care for the culture of everything must be made safe. The governent must prohibit people from taking their own risks. Sounds pretty boring to me.

I think technology will take care of the concussion problem:

High tech football helmet with airbags

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:I don't care for

EXC wrote:

I don't care for the culture of everything must be made safe. The governent must prohibit people from taking their own risks. Sounds pretty boring to me.

I think technology will take care of the concussion problem:

High tech football helmet with airbags

Worthless.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3929
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:EXC

digitalbeachbum wrote:

EXC wrote:

I don't care for the culture of everything must be made safe. The governent must prohibit people from taking their own risks. Sounds pretty boring to me.

I think technology will take care of the concussion problem:

High tech football helmet with airbags

Worthless.

As long as they ban genetic engineering and drugs, I think the players have reached the upper limit on speed, size and strength. Cars have gotten safer even as speeds increased, thanks to technology. Preventing concussions is just an engineering problem, if the football leagues want to pay, they can eliminate them.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:digitalbeachbum

EXC wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

EXC wrote:

I don't care for the culture of everything must be made safe. The governent must prohibit people from taking their own risks. Sounds pretty boring to me.

I think technology will take care of the concussion problem:

High tech football helmet with airbags

Worthless.

As long as they ban genetic engineering and drugs, I think the players have reached the upper limit on speed, size and strength. Cars have gotten safer even as speeds increased, thanks to technology. Preventing concussions is just an engineering problem, if the football leagues want to pay, they can eliminate them.

The problem is, as I stated previously, the more padding they have the more they "HIT" rather than tackle.

Look at old football films. They have very little armor on and they don't go flying in to each other.

Look at Rugby and Aussie Football. They actually teach their players to tackle with proper forms so that they reduce the changes to get injured.

The NFL needs to be changed or else it won't survive. I was thinking this while watching the last Pro Bowl game this past weekend.

It is the lowest rated sporting event compared to all other NFL games, and all other pro-sporting games (NFL, NBA, MLB, etc).

I was thinking that if they changed the way tackles would be made then players wouldn't need to to worry as much about getting injured and you would have a better game. Instead the game played last weekend was a joke. The reporters were saying it was a pillow match. No one was tackling each other.

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:The

digitalbeachbum wrote:

The problem is, as I stated previously, the more padding they have the more they "HIT" rather than tackle.

Look at old football films. They have very little armor on and they don't go flying in to each other.

Look at Rugby and Aussie Football. They actually teach their players to tackle with proper forms so that they reduce the changes to get injured.

The NFL needs to be changed or else it won't survive. I was thinking this while watching the last Pro Bowl game this past weekend.

It is the lowest rated sporting event compared to all other NFL games, and all other pro-sporting games (NFL, NBA, MLB, etc).

I was thinking that if they changed the way tackles would be made then players wouldn't need to to worry as much about getting injured and you would have a better game. Instead the game played last weekend was a joke. The reporters were saying it was a pillow match. No one was tackling each other.

 

No one watches the pro bowl for the same reason no one watches rugby or aussie football- because we like violence, we like the hard hits and we like to watch people who are athletic beasts capable of hurting people. Given that the NFL brings in substantially more money than rugby or aussie football, I don't see how it would be a good idea to mimic them. 

The NFL is not in any danger of disappearing, their annual revenue continues to grow every year and is already over $9 billion. As long as they don't make their rules so restrictive that every game looks like the pro bowl they will be just fine.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

The problem is, as I stated previously, the more padding they have the more they "HIT" rather than tackle.

Look at old football films. They have very little armor on and they don't go flying in to each other.

Look at Rugby and Aussie Football. They actually teach their players to tackle with proper forms so that they reduce the changes to get injured.

The NFL needs to be changed or else it won't survive. I was thinking this while watching the last Pro Bowl game this past weekend.

It is the lowest rated sporting event compared to all other NFL games, and all other pro-sporting games (NFL, NBA, MLB, etc).

I was thinking that if they changed the way tackles would be made then players wouldn't need to to worry as much about getting injured and you would have a better game. Instead the game played last weekend was a joke. The reporters were saying it was a pillow match. No one was tackling each other.

 

No one watches the pro bowl for the same reason no one watches rugby or aussie football- because we like violence, we like the hard hits and we like to watch people who are athletic beasts capable of hurting people. Given that the NFL brings in substantially more money than rugby or aussie football, I don't see how it would be a good idea to mimic them. 

The NFL is not in any danger of disappearing, their annual revenue continues to grow every year and is already over $9 billion. As long as they don't make their rules so restrictive that every game looks like the pro bowl they will be just fine.  

I remember reading an article where a poll taken at NASCAR races showed than 80-someting percent of the people who go to the races expect a crash and it was around 40-something percent which said they enjoyed the crashes/are disappointed when their isn't one.

I sort of understand this because watching a race go round-and-round-and-round... is well... boring.

I'd like to see more skill in the NFL rather than pumped up steroid mongo's hit each other. Gone are the days of Barry Sanders and Walter Payton.