(04-26-2018 03:17 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: (04-25-2018 06:06 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: What's wrong with violence?
Part of the problem with America today is that in many wealthier or more liberal neighborhoods, violence in all forms is repressed.
I'm sorry you interpreted what I said that way.
The violent nature of the sport is how the game can play out if optimized. Take the infamous Clowney hit; probably the perfect defensive play where a guy is stopped literally in his spot (so, no extra yardage), knocked hard enough he would probably have to leave the game (neutralizing an opponent), and forcing a turnover (giving the offense an immediate opportunity to score points).
To me, that is how football should be played on its base rules. However, how can one not also identify how violent that is at its most objective level, and understand how no other sport is constructed to allow for that style of play? It's not about good or bad...it's about its nature.
I like the sport. However, I don't align with those who think we're a soft society if we impose added rules and regulations making the game safer for those who play it. Making it safer, while maybe turning off some people with some other issues going on within themselves, likely keeps the sport around longer, much in the same way changes in the game early on helped keep it playable. Hey, we're at that point again...and it thrived for those changes...why can't it again?
That's a pretty presumptuous statement and quite frankly it can be interpreted as either being extremely judgmental or even arrogant depending on the interpretation of the reader. I think for most of those who don't like the endless rule changes it's more of a matter that they played the game, realized it for what it was, accepted the risks, and enjoyed playing it.
I'm just curious but did you play in high school or college? Or is your opinion on this matter informed in some other way?
I wouldn't disagree that we need some rule changes, but oddly some of the rules that need to be changed are replacement rules, especially around the kicking game.
I have no idea what might happen with the equipment technology, but nothing is going to stop the sudden impact and change of momentum that leads to brain trauma. Better helmets can only help so much. The body simply isn't designed for rapid deceleration. But in spite of all of the CTE issues the game actually does more damage to the joints, particularly knees, and as an old man who played and suffered knee injury how well I know.
But as to society? It is both more violent today than when I was a kid, and much softer today than when I was a kid, and I think those too phenomenons are interlinked. I would say that we are unhealthily softer in the middle and upper class, and inconceivably more violent among the poor. But maybe that's because I had 20 years of work in non profits to back up my opinion. Does that mean that poor people are all violent, far from it. But the violent among them are more violent to all than they were in the 50's or 60's and it's incrementally gotten that way with the drug trade, and other crime endeavors. We had a 14 year old kid who was a stellar human being with a basketball future gunned down on his mother's front porch because he refused to join a gang so they killed him for dissing them.
Sorry but that just doesn't happen in many middle class neighborhoods, but poor kids face crud every day of their lives and most folks who might post here have very limited exposure to that. I think our society owes it to all citizens to clean up these kinds of threats from all neighborhoods. There's something inherently wrong with thinking that confining it to certain neighborhoods is somehow a good thing.
So on the one hand we have bubble children whose parents control and plan every aspect of their lives, probably ignoring the rights of the kids to have a hand in determining the course of their own lives. And the social insulation ill prepares them to encounter those not like them. But perhaps that has more to do with "issues going on within themselves" like the narcissism of the parents maybe who might be trying to make their children a projection of themselves.
And on the other hand we have parents who are looking for anyway to get their kids out of poverty and praying every day that the nature of where they live doesn't kill their children. Now there are internal issues a plenty going on there too. But then that is true of the lower middle class, the middle class, and the upper middle class and the wealthy. In my experience most people are working on "issues going on within themselves" and the interesting part of your statement is that those who recognize their issues and are working on them aren't the problem.
So give me a guy or gal who has it all figured out and knows exactly what they are doing and I'll show you those who will have the biggest problems regardless of their socioeconomic class. Charm, charisma, intelligence and drive can all be characteristics of a sociopath too.
So your little glib remark was out of place in what otherwise was a logical position and probably says more about you than those who don't like seeing the rules of the game monkeyed around with yet again. Baseball is not a violent sport and it is the one I loved the most when I played. But you would find oodles of baseball fans who still hate the designated hitter rule. It screwed up statistics in a game where statistics are a religion. When people have played, and enjoyed playing any game, change irks them and it has nothing to do with "issues going on within themselves".
As for how I felt about the softness issue. It is a concern when so many kids who have been sheltered are thrust together with those who are literally fighting to survive and the worst of the latter terrorizes the former. In the South in public schools where true integration is more of an issue the coddled kids are going to get exposed. They need to be able to exhibit enough confidence in themselves so as not to be an inviting target. And while I know this generation really hasn't experienced a war that threatens us, the world every year has more and more people and fewer resources to go around. The chances are that when our technology has been equaled by enemies we are going to have to fight a war where our lives are dependent upon some survival instincts. I hope not because I have 5 grandchildren. But if it happens and our kids aren't prepared then the blame is ours.
I loved football, but I agree it has to change to survive. But when football has been removed, soccer and hockey will be next. Then women playing volleyball and basketball will all one day were something that looks like a boxers head protector or a bicycle helmet. And protecting them is a good thing. But making them softer in their response to an ever increasing hostile world is not.