Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sword and Shield: The NFL's Very Bad Year

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • fallforward3y+
    replied
    Same old same old, this hot topic will hopefully freeze soon.

    Ultimately, the answer is letting people make their own decisions. Do they want to play or not? That's as far as society need to go to help this problem. I guarantee you many people, including myself(I play semi pro) would gladly play football despite the risk. I very much doubt that anyone plays and doesn't know it's potentially dangerous.

    Here are a few ideas though, that could make things better without ruining the sport.

    1-Stop the 'play hurt' culture. Yes, you should play through bruises and you will almost certainly get a little knicked while playing. Don't play through injuries, fractured bones that haven't healed properly and concussions. STOP criticizing players for not playing injured. We need to knock off idiot thinking like that someone is well enough to play as long as they can walk, you have to be able to do a lot more than walk to play. Let injuries heal properly, a career is more important than the rest of the game. A 100% back up will often be more effective than an injured starter anyway.

    I bet just not playing until your healed properly will reduce the risk of serious injuries, and will allow players to play a little longer even.

    2-Do more rotations, use specialist players. With rotations, especially at the RB position the backs take less hits. Look for the best back at each specific skill, and give it to them in situations where they can use it instead of looking for an every down back. Better play in each area, players will take less wear and tear.

    Instead of crap like taking hitting out of practice, how about a path that doesn't go down the road towards taking tackling out of the sport? You need to practice the tackling aspect or your team will probably suck at it.

    3-Players should avoid unnecessary punishment. When I say unnecessary punishment, I mean something that will not gain you any more yards, or help you hold someone to less yards. Hitting should stay a part of the game, it's my favorite part, but here's what I mean:

    For instance, if your a defender and you see a RB coming at you, don't try and lay the wood unless you actually have a reasonable shot at driving back the runner. If you see Marshawn Lynch coming at you and your Patrick Willis then maybe give it a shot, but if your a smaller, weaker DB then just wrap up and take down. They will fall forward for the extra 2 anyway, and you will take a lot more punishment than they will so just make the tackle, surrender the 2. It's better to focus on the wrap up anyway, it ensures they go down and if they try to deflect forward off the hit it will better limit their extra yards.

    It's a football taboo of sorts to advocate not laying the wood, but in the end it is the better solution when you can't deliver it, and the finish is what's important not the initial hit.

    I'd also like to see offenses try and set up skill players in more 1 on 1 situations since I like those match ups, and for DBs to go for the ball instead of the hit. I imagine it's more effective, and hitting a guy who isn't looking and isn't dropping his shoulder to try and break or get more yards really isn't all that amazing even if it does create a wow factor.
    Last edited by fallforward3y+; 12-31-2013, 09:24 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Houshmazode
    replied
    Originally posted by notwithit View Post
    There is nothing new under the sun.. Human nature is not necessarily the greatest or worst. In fact, we see countless times in history the atrocities. One could attribute any sort of violent entertainment to, "A few getting wealthy off the suffering of others".

    Arena games are probably a great example of this, though nobody in the NFL has died on the field. Many have been paralyzed.

    So what does someone do about the issue of concussions, et al? Do we force parents to sign consent waivers? Do we require clauses in contracts that are mandatory to bring up saying, "You may be die, dismembered, disfigured, blah blah, and even want to kill yourself later in life"?

    Can we honestly blame the league, or anyone, for that matter for knowing that hitting each others heads together causes head trauma and possible changes in mental faculties? That seems like such a logical conclusion to make regardless of experimentation to back it up. I mean heck, when I was younger my soccer teams would joke about how sad it was that pop warner football games had ambulances parked for each game compared to soccer who, if at all, had one for the whole 15+ fields.

    I can't imagine everyone involved didn't understand that the violence involved in playing football and the lack of true protection would lead to serious injuries and possible effects later in life.

    Does the issue then become one of who is to blame?

    I think maybe we should look no further than to our own morality and personal failures. If the issue is healthcare after being in the NFL, could we look into that players personal finances and see that they did due diligence to leave enough in their 401k, bank account, and insurance policies to deal with the issues? Maybe we should stop thinking only in the now and find a better balance between leaving a legacy that will not condemn our future selves and family?

    Maybe we should laud the NFL for the positive effect of certain players just as much as we blame the NFL for the negativity of certain players as well.
    As far as the head injuries and CTE goes, I think that the NFL has ignored it and not spent enough of their time or money to dedicate to research to help prevent or cure it. They already do not pay taxes (the NFL is a nonprofit organization) and donate a small amount compared to the taxes they would pay to charities each year. The scientific part of it has been ignored for too long imo. I still don't believe the NFL takes care of its retired players like it should. I do agree with you though that players know most of the risks. Most people did not know of CTE though until recently.

    As far as officiating changes, the league has done its job to prevent head injuries. The quality of the officiating is absolutely terrible though. Last week was another terrible week with the KC/SD field goal noncall and the delay of game in the DAL game.

    Leave a comment:


  • notwithit
    replied
    There is nothing new under the sun.. Human nature is not necessarily the greatest or worst. In fact, we see countless times in history the atrocities. One could attribute any sort of violent entertainment to, "A few getting wealthy off the suffering of others".

    Arena games are probably a great example of this, though nobody in the NFL has died on the field. Many have been paralyzed.

    So what does someone do about the issue of concussions, et al? Do we force parents to sign consent waivers? Do we require clauses in contracts that are mandatory to bring up saying, "You may be die, dismembered, disfigured, blah blah, and even want to kill yourself later in life"?

    Can we honestly blame the league, or anyone, for that matter for knowing that hitting each others heads together causes head trauma and possible changes in mental faculties? That seems like such a logical conclusion to make regardless of experimentation to back it up. I mean heck, when I was younger my soccer teams would joke about how sad it was that pop warner football games had ambulances parked for each game compared to soccer who, if at all, had one for the whole 15+ fields.

    I can't imagine everyone involved didn't understand that the violence involved in playing football and the lack of true protection would lead to serious injuries and possible effects later in life.

    Does the issue then become one of who is to blame?

    I think maybe we should look no further than to our own morality and personal failures. If the issue is healthcare after being in the NFL, could we look into that players personal finances and see that they did due diligence to leave enough in their 401k, bank account, and insurance policies to deal with the issues? Maybe we should stop thinking only in the now and find a better balance between leaving a legacy that will not condemn our future selves and family?

    Maybe we should laud the NFL for the positive effect of certain players just as much as we blame the NFL for the negativity of certain players as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • Houshmazode
    started a topic Sword and Shield: The NFL's Very Bad Year

    Sword and Shield: The NFL's Very Bad Year

    Sword and Shield

    Looking back on the NFL's very bad year
    By Hua Hsu on December 26, 2013

    PRINT

    About five years ago, "protecting the shield" became a thing. The phrase was introduced and repeated over and over by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell — he was "protecting the shield" whenever he had to discipline a player or wayward owner. He "protects the shield" when he negotiates with the unions, hugs a first-round draft pick, or cuts league ties with Bradley Cooper. "Protecting the shield" is his way of dramatizing his solemn, possibly chivalrous duty to the league, its image, and its billions of dollars of annual revenue, and he has said it so many times, you'd be forgiven for thinking the words actually make sense. Every workplace wants you to feel like you're part of a community. For the modern NFL, it's Goodell's mythical shield — that red, white, and blue logo — that is every player's Constitution, Holy Bible, and secret handshake. It's a shield Goodell protects to the tune of $30 million a year. It's a shield that shields you from wondering how perverse it is that your workplace is asking for you to protect it — but from what?

    Has a professional sports league ever had a worse year than the NFL in 2013?1 Consider everything that has happened since the Ravens won the Super Bowl. The most prominent controversy involves the most basic physics of the sport. In October, Steve Fainaru and Mark Fainaru-Wada published League of Denial, a book exploring the NFL's generally negligent attitude toward the neurological disease suffered by many former players. When ESPN backed out of the book's companion Frontline documentary,2 it only amplified the sense of widespread conspiracy. Two feature films about the NFL and concussions are in the works as well. In late August, the league agreed to pay $765 million to settle a lawsuit brought by 4,500 ex-players spanning multiple generations. Some have opted out, either in hopes of a larger individual payout or to force the NFL into disclosing what it actually knew. Others are beginning to realize their initial suspicions were correct: The NFL got off cheap.

    All this seemed to exacerbate the distance between the boss and the employees, the cold realities of business and our stray desires, a fan's NFL Films–guided memory of the clever, cunning Jim McMahon and how he seems today. Player safety has taken on a different meaning in the CTE era, as Brandon Meriweather pointed out last month: "You just have to go low now, man. You've got to end people's careers. You got to tear people's ACLs and mess up people's knees. You can't hit them high anymore." Questions turned to whether Meriweather — not exactly one of the league's calmer souls — was a dirty player. But his underlying questions were what other players have begun asking, too: Can I trust the shield to protect me?
    Super Bowl
    Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty Images

    It feels quaint now that the lights went out during the Super Bowl. This was the year the NFL locker room became even weirder than one might have ever imagined, such that Jonathan Martin just had to pack up and leave. You have to be pretty comfortable with violence to love the sport, but the playacting of warfare ceased to feel metaphorical. Former Pro Bowl tight end Aaron Hernandez stands accused of at least one murder, possibly others. Amid the zillions of thinkpieces extrapolating some link between tattoo density and gang violence, the most chilling reaction came from one of Hernandez's former peers. When 24-year-old linebacker Rolando McClain retired in May, he would later say he "was feeling like Aaron Hernandez or something, like I just wanted to kill somebody." John Moffitt, a 27-year-old offensive lineman, left the game as well; he wanted to do some reading and thinking while he still could. That you could just walk away, as McClain and Moffitt did, seemed supremely bizarre, especially given that their modest horizons simply promised little more than "anything but football."

    It was the year the Redskins continued to exist as such. Jimmy Haslam, new owner of the Cleveland Browns, stands accused of defrauding consumers of millions of dollars owed to them in fuel rebates. Higher-ups often speak of the integrity of the game as something one nasty player can ruin. But integrity becomes a joke when bad behavior is modeled by the boss, not the workers. A party boat full of dudes with pistols tucked into their sweatpants will never rival the childish petulance of Daniel Snyder.

    You might say this is an arbitrary, overly negative accounting of the NFL's 2013 — that it overlooks the emergence of Russell Wilson and Vontaze Burfict, the comeback of Alex Smith, the erratic wizardry of Ron Rivera and Chip Kelly, the old-man lures and snares of Megatron. Sure, it's this unceasing cycle of HD-rendered personalities and self-regenerating dramas that keeps the NFL's viewership numbers streets ahead of any sport in America. But it's beginning to feel like the NFL is nearing a crossroads. A cluster of scandal and tragedy will always trigger some "soul of ___ball" crisis-talk among fans and critics. And the NFL, vexed by drugs and labor issues, already suffered through a rough 1980s.3

    When we speak of the integrity of the game — of protecting the sport rather than the shield — it's more than just the assorted mistakes of a few twentysomethings. It's the growing sense that the business protects only itself — that the growing interest in concussions and head trauma will reveal a knowing conspiracy rather than mere negligence. It's the possibility that participation in Pop Warner football will continue to decline, and who knows what that will mean a decade from now? It's the reality that a player like Jonathan Martin or Anthony Hargrove will become the only name we circle out of a sprawling, toxic hierarchy — we have long ignored the ones at the top because we usually have no need to know who they are. A lot of the challenges facing the NFL right now aren't about the players; they're about how the league and its franchises and locker rooms are run. It's about the very organizational logic of calling it "the shield" and asking for protection. It's the growing chasm between those who actually govern the league and their interchangeable employees. It's the perverse logic that allows owners to convince us that players with teasingly brief careers are overpaid while the tenured commissioner heads a nonprofit for a far greater salary. The issue isn't whether Goodell actually has any private fears about a player dying on the field; it's that he probably should. Of course all of this is willfully naive and little of it ultimately matters. The NFL is doing more business than ever, the players larger than life and the structure invisible until we are forced to reckon with it. It is a business that works hard to remove us from the physical immediacy of the game, to give us something else to think about while the chains are being moved. Maybe this is why the NFL has redoubled its efforts in Europe and Asia, where the American pastime unfolds like an exotic video game. Each year, we hear reports about how attendance at games is falling while NFL profits continue to surge toward Goodell's not-that-crazy goal of $25 billion in annual revenues.4 At this point, maybe it's by design that the live experience of going to a football game has become the afterthought — here and abroad. It's a much better product when experienced from a distance.

    The brute physicality of football remained an abstraction for me until a few years ago, when I was at a game, shivering, waiting for a player to be carted off on a stretcher. In the absence of a commercial, you remember that it was the bruising hits that first drew you in. One generation applauds "Thunder and Destruction," the next looks forward to yelling, "JACKED UP!" at the TV. There's no righteous path, only the wrong intentions of the present. A lot of people need protection. A shield is just a barrier.
    http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...-very-bad-year

    Thoughts?
Working...
X