Take the facemasks off of helmets and you'll see things drop in an instant. When that player no longer fears taking his own nose off with a vicious hit to the head of another, thats when things began to escalate in terms of violent hits. As the years have passed the game is played at a 'higher level' than before. How many hits do guys take in their legs as opposed to the shoulders and helmets. Just look at the fact that many players don't wear thigh pads anymore. They're not getting hit there, and trying to cheat on weight and maneuverability.
Obviously I was talking about from a hit. People risk serious injury and death for a hell of a lot less than an NFL player's salary so the 'they know the risk' argument is irrelevant. If I decide to drive my car without wearing a seat belt I know the risk. That didn't stop the government from fining people who are caught not wearing it. If God forbid we see a player take a vicious hit and drop dead you will see the government get involved. And they won't care about the culture or what fans think. The NFL is right to try to take this stuff out now before it gets to that point. You can assert dominance over an opponent in a game without knocking their brains out of their head. Players want to play the game the way their predecessors did. I get that. But they have to stop and realize that they are capable of putting on a much more vicious hit than say a Dick Butkus or another guy from the past era.
Don't just tell me, show me.......better yet, I'll show you hits from different eras..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0vKO-sHZTY&feature=youtube_gdata_player ^^^This is the Darryl Stingley hit Here's a hit today http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSioBnAeXSg&feature=youtube_gdata_player ^^^^^Danny woodhead getting rocked Theismann's leg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH8SZOqc6Pk&feature=youtube_gdata_player Napoleon McCallum http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT4kAKB2CT8&feature=youtube_gdata_player Steve young http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFT_9Klo6xE&feature=youtube_gdata_player Nothing overly vicious in these plays, 3 of the 4 ended careers, and one ended up with paralysis. All from different times in the league's history, and 1 looked to be targeting the head. Knowing risk is absolutely relevant despite what you may think. If you risk driving in a government vehicle without a seat belt, which is a rule, then you risk your life and your job. NFL Players know even legal hits have the potential to end their careers, and still play, whether it is for the paycheck, the adrenaline rush, love of the game, staying in the spotlight, or it is all they know how to do, they know the risk and still go on. To dismiss this point is merely trying to fit the facts to your point. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
apparently, the redskins are now under review as well, from gregg williams time over there, would be nice if they somehow would lose their 1st pick this year http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7644139/nfl-reportedly-probe-washington-redskins-bounties
Last time I checked ending a career and ending a life prematurely aren't quite the same thing. The NFL is concerned that the latter could become an issue in the future. It is a legit concern and once again, it doesn't make any difference whether the players accept the risk or not. You are trying to take what I'm saying out of context to fit your purpose. I am talking about players potentially dying and getting their brains scrambled and you're posting links to Joe Theisman getting his leg screwed up. Irrelevant and it doesn't change the FACT that NFL players today are bigger, stronger, faster, and hit harder than their predecessors. This is indisputable. Are you seriously trying to tell me that players in the 70s hit as hard as guys do now? That they were as fast or as big or as strong? I'm sure for the right price we could find people who will accept the risk of participating in Roman style gladiator fights to the death. Using your logic everything is on the table as long as the participants 'know the risk'. If the brain injuries continue and continue to get more serious you will see people over the head of the commissioner get involved. Despite what YOU think, it could and would happen in that scenario and they won't care if the players are willing to accept the risk. I'd accept the risk too for millions a year. The NFL is taking the right action by trying to take care of some of these things themselves despite what people like James Harrison think about it.
Still waiting for you to show me examples of players getting killed on the field. Can't do it can you? And the point of showing those hits was simple, all but one were legal, and the legal ones ended careers. You can attempt to legislate hitting as much as you want, but it still doesn't change the FACT that injuries WILL happen in a CONTACT sport. Keep spinning and ignoring that NFL players know the risks and and still play. Here are some quotes affirming that by the way..... http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Nov18/0,4670,FBNHidingConcussionsQuoteBox,00.html http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...h-injury-risks-nfl-players-deserve-the-money/ And finally..... http://www.prosebeforehos.com/sports-editor/11/19/recognizing-culture-of-violence-nfl/ The last one acknowledges the there has been a 10% change in size speed and strength, a point I have ever contested. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ill take it one step further...why are we only talking about the saints losing picks and facing a fine? I mean if the NCAA can strip teams of championships for recruiting violations and kids taking a little money on the side then we should be talking about stripping the saints for intentionally trying to injure players. That's the only way you stop this type of bs permanently.
I didn't ignore that, in fact I addressed it pretty clearly. I had to take a minute to confirm you're actually addressing the posts I've typed. The league is trying to minimize serious injuries, everybody knows you can't eliminate them completely. I can't think of a more obvious and pointless thing to type in regard to the discussion. You know good and well what I've been saying you're obviously just trying to play games at this point. You want an example of something that hasn't happened yet? This is speculation based on continuing research on the brain and the effects these increasingly violent hits can have on it. I never said a player has already been killed yet you ask me for an example. Once again, you're trying to play games here. I obviously don't give a **** what the players themselves say about this for reasons I have made VERY clear in past posts. Because you can convince somebody to do something of their own free will doesn't automatically mean it's just fine. That's such a simple point there's no plainer way I can really put it. Men will do anything and take any risk when the price is right. It's irrelevant to the topic of protecting NFL players as best as possible in today's game. Completely irrelevant.
Speculation and $.65 get me a soda out of a vending machine. You say I'm playing a game because I don't take your word for it?? Show me ANYTHING that makes the intellectual leap that you and the NFL are making? Back your point up with something more than once again, don't tell me, show me. Also if the NFL were serious about limiting TBI through technology advancements and rules changes they would quit being ******* and recommend a helmet, or actually develop a standard for measuring helmets.....instead if letting Virginia Tech do it. http://neurosciencenews.com/football-helmet-ratings-reducing-concussion-risk-nfl-concussions/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem is that they don't know the exact risks. The science from the 1970s didn't reveal nearly as much as the science does today. The science 20 years from now is going to tell us a lot that we don't know today.
Is injuring players illegal? I don't think its fair to assume that these "bounties" entailed anything malicious.
