Subject: Shazier et al
Date: Thu Dec 7 15:07:08 2017
User: joeygray
Message:I speak as a man who has followed football all my life, who though too young to remember the 1958 NFL championship game, also can't remember a time when there wasn't still a buzz about that game even three years later in these parts. Remember Tom Matte and his wristband as the third string quarterback, yes. Remember Unitas's last completion as a Colt, to Eddie Hinton, yes. Attended two games in Baltimore this year already, yes.
But Shazier's injury is just the latest in an increasing long line of evidence as to what we are doing here: we are paying people to sacrifice their lives for our entertainment. Sure, it's a keisterload of money, and sure, some escape the debilitation entirely and quite a few more escape the worst of it. But still. I'm finding it harder and harder to continue on. The more that happens and the more we learn, the harder. Feel anything like this, Snowguy?
Date: Thu Dec 7 18:09:07 2017
User: Snowguy
Message:Right on, joey. I have all the same misgivings. And it doesn't
make me feel any better about the jeopardy of these men, when I see Roger Goodell paid $40Million a year. He doesn't take a snap or carry a football.
It's gladiators in the ring pledging to do their best, to the death if necessary, for the Caesar and the other onlookers.
The risks these guys take is crazy. I understand Ryan Shazier underwent surgery on his spine last night. That doesn't bode well for him. Will he be able to walk again?
Date: Thu Dec 7 19:19:39 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:I'm not Snowguy, but this is something that's been bugging me for quite a few years, long before all the evidence for significant brain injuries has been becoming available. The "gladiators" have just become bigger, stronger, and faster than ever before - and by a rather large degree.
The recent study that showed that 99% of deceased NFL players (N=111) studied had chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy was simply stunning. And that was quickly followed by the report that Aaron Hernandez's brain had the worst CTE situation the researchers had ever seen (paraphrasing). His brain resembled someone 3 times his age. And while that can't be ruled as the proximate cause of his actions, CTE is absolutely implicated in aggressiveness, depression, violent outbursts, etc.
I used to watch a lot of NFL. But I've become far less interested as the years have gone by. Maybe it's partly due to the fact that the sheer numbers of seasons, games, players, etc., has just become a what's-the-point situation for me.
[Never been a Colts fan, of course, especially after they picked up and left town in the middle of the night, so I'll essentially always be against them. (Not to mention Indy is such a boring, flat place (sorry, hotnurse!) But I didn't like the crew-cut Unitas (sorry Snowguy!) way back before then - and consider Namath's and the Jets' win in the '69 Super Bowl to be one of the greatest points in time in professional sports in my lifetime). But I digress........]
But I think it's more this (violence/injury) issue. These people's lives are being 'ruined', albeit willingly(?), and they're well paid for the risks they take. One could easily say the same thing about firefighters, coal miners, farmers, scuba divers (for a living), etc., etc. I guess we all "pays our nickel and takes our chances", so to speak.
Link: study of CTE in deceased NFL players
Date: Thu Dec 7 19:39:02 2017
User: free@last
Message:I have not watch a football game since the Superbowl almost four years ago. The concussions, the wife/girlfriend beatings with little to no repercussions, the cheating with little to no repercussions; I tuned out and moved on.
Date: Thu Dec 7 21:04:41 2017
User: joeygray
Message:(Aside to TN: yeah, I'm aware that the rest of the country loved that game. We in Baltimore didn't really recover from it for 25 years, even more in my case because it took me a bunch of years before I would embrace the stolen Ravens. (I remember not even watching the 2001 Super Bowl with my distaste for 'doing to Cleveland what had been done to us.') The Jets win was the direct cause of Shula leaving for Miami a year later; with Shula still here it's very possible that Rosenbloom never swaps the Colts for the Rams and lets Irsay into the league, in which case the Irsays never run the team into the ground and then leave.)
I still follow the league but with decreasing interest. Decreasing fandom, as it were. I was in the stands Monday before last, Texans at Ravens, and in the first quarter Matt Judon slammed a Texans receiver, caught behind the line on a wr screen, to the ground and drew a 15 yarder. There was no booing of the ref from me like there would have been a few years back. I was like just tackle the guy, man.
Date: Fri Dec 8 10:18:33 2017
User: hotnurse
Message:...and it's people like us who propagate this "entertainment".
TN, thanks for the link. But, I have to add to your statement "These people's lives are being 'ruined', albeit willingly(?), and they're well paid for the risks they take. One could easily say the same thing about firefighters, coal miners, farmers, scuba divers (for a living), etc., etc. I guess we all "pays our nickel and takes our chances", so to speak."
But...these guys are not paid nearly what the other guys are and not paid nearly enough for their risks. Imo.
Date: Fri Dec 8 11:32:57 2017
User: Snowguy
Message:You are right, of course, ab out the risks, and that the risks are not rewarded similarly. But the difference here is that the NFL players are in a class by themselves. Millions of people can and do become fire fighters, miners, etc.
But not NFL (and other pro sports) players. They are rewarded due to the scarcity of potential employees at that elite level.
And, of course, their skills and fitness are the result of almost a lifetime of work and dedication. Not so with police, fire, etc., who are typically hired as adults and begin their training then.
Date: Fri Dec 8 11:38:47 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:All correct. Beat me to it. And trust us, there are thousands of would-be NFL players more than willing to take on those risks, etc. for the glory, money, and pain. Would they be found capable.
Date: Fri Dec 8 11:53:48 2017
User: Snowguy
Message:Yes. Even they guys on the bottoms of the 53-man rosters and the practice squads are not first-or-second-team worthy. And only a small percentage of top college athletes make it every year onto a pro squad, as others are dismissed because they just can't compete well enough to hold their positions. (Even though most trained all their lives to "make the pros.)
Typical pro careers are in single-figure years. (I see now it is 3.3 years.) Not quite the same as a fire fighter who works until retirement and then enjoys a pension.
Link: NFL Average careers
Date: Fri Dec 8 12:49:48 2017
User: joeygray
Message:These points about the pay are beside the point I was making, which is about players ruining or prematurely ending their lives for my entertainment. Society obviously needs and benefits from there being firefighters, police, military, miners, professional divers, etc. I suppose you can argue there is some overarching societal benefit to the existence of gladiators... but I got a tough time with such argument. I do know that, deprived of any one source of entertainment, I and anybody else can replace it with another, and easily. I'm edging to the brink of following in free's footsteps... and if enough of us start to feel that way the greed-driven NFL is going down.
Date: Fri Dec 8 13:04:23 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:Yeah, I think that's where we're headed, and futbol will (eventually) replace football in this country. It will be while, but it will happen.
I'm mystified by this MMA stuff, too. I could make some pithy comment about the followers of that, but will leave it unsaid.
Date: Fri Dec 8 14:50:47 2017
User: Snowguy
Message:Here's something I recently wrote to the Editorial/Opinion Page Editor of our local newspaper. It was printed in a recent edition. (I sent in response to an Editorial.)
--------------------------------------------------------
In regard to the NFL being greedy, guilty as charged. Greedy in so many ways. Yes, football after only 4 days "rest," especially when one team travels for the game, and one or both may have traveled on the Sunday before, is just unfair to the players. But it might not be necessary to throw the baby out when emptying the bathwater. Firstly, there is already a small inherent competitive advantage in playing Thursday night games. Unlike Monday night, when a team has a short week to the next Sunday, but their opponent has a full weeks rest, the Thursday night rest advantage is this:
Both teams then have a week-plus of rest, healing and preparation before their next game. Not so for their next opponent. Small advantage there. But how about the short week from Sunday to Thursday? Simply schedule every Thursday night game after each team's "bye" week. A week and four days rest from their last game, and a week and three days rest following Thursday night before their next game. (Still a competitive advantage over their next opponent.) I suspect the schedule-makers can work out the details so likely attractive Thursday night matchups can be arranged. (Up to six teams are scheduled off every week.)
In fact, teams having a bad game from "rust" coming back from two weeks off should be less common with the more balanced rests. More rest, less rust, what's not to like? I suspect the players would love this schedule. And fans can get their mid-week fix.
By the way, I agree with the editorial. Adding two weeks to the schedule--going to 18 games--would be an awful money-grab at the expense of player well-being.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri Dec 8 15:58:01 2017
User: joeygray
Message:Yeah. I agreed with this wholeheartedly when I first came across it a while back. It converts a team's bye week into two mini-byes, the first of which has no competitive advantage since both teams get it. But the minibyes are consecutive, which is not terribly attractive to players. More importantly, it means no Thursday games weeks 2-5, since there are no byes until week 5 to convert. (Obviously week one is no problem.) That's completely counter to the greed monger agenda, which knows that the first few weeks of the season are the best selling Thursdays, as they follow the long off season and hopes and interest are at their highest.
Still, it's better than what we have now.
Date: Fri Dec 8 18:25:22 2017
User: BuzzClik
Message:The advantage of a "mini bye" is far outweighed by the high probability of being injured on short rest. (Brees should know. )
At least two Frecellers here were (are) eager participants in endurance competitions requiring long hours of training and intense competition. A rule of thumb in distance running is that you don't compete (run at race pace) for same number of days as the number of miles in your previous race. Thus, you could run a 10K (6.2 miles) every weekend, but you should really take a month off from competing in a marathon (26.2 miles). This varies with the individual, of course, but I've witnessed some nasty injuries with those who pushed the limits. And, in distance running, no one is running into your body at full speed while you aren't looking.
So, if the NFL players tell you they need a full week between games, give it to them. Flush the Thursday games forever.
Post follow-up