ALF Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Wow, what a horrible argument...a small step above TP, though. Would you outlaw football to prevent injuries
mannc Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Would you outlaw football to prevent injuries No, but that's far from the only option.
ALF Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 No, but that's far from the only option. Agree, what other options would you do
Sig1Hunter Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 (edited) How is it a horrible argument? Players are now well aware of the risks, and they volunteer to play the game. It certainly doesn't absolve the NFL from responsibility in covering up the issue in the past, nor in continuing to take steps to try to make the game safer, but it is a 100 percent voluntary choice by the players. Edited August 7, 2017 by Sig1Hunter
mannc Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Agree, what other options would you do There are lots of things that could be done differently, starting with more stringently enforcing the current rules designed to avoid head and neck injuries. Personally, i would adopt rugby tacking rules. Unlike some others, i do not believe it would negatively affect the product on the field. A lot of these guys just don't know how to tackle.
mannc Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 How is it a horrible argument? Players are now well aware of the risks, and they volunteer to play the game. It certainly doesn't absolve the NFL from responsibility in covering up the issue in the past, nor in continuing to take steps to try to make the game safer, but it is a 100 percent voluntary choice by the players.No, the players have not been "well aware of the risks"--scientists and doctors are still trying to get a handle on that, and the NFL played a disgraceful role in trying to cover up and/or downplay those risks. Regardless whether playing football is a voluntary choice, there is lots that can be done to make it safer. And of course it's not really a "choice" for young kids who play the game. At any rate, NFL owners should not be making asinine public statements like the one Pegula made.
ALF Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 The NFL is trying with new rules , penalties and large fines. They do need to cover medical expenses of present and past players for football related injuries and disability compensation.
BringBackOrton Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Can Terry tell us the two things you need to win in the NFL yet?
4_kidd_4 Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Can Terry tell us the two things you need to win in the NFL yet? Winning and fracking.
Malazan Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 No, the players have not been "well aware of the risks"--scientists and doctors are still trying to get a handle on that, and the NFL played a disgraceful role in trying to cover up and/or downplay those risks. Regardless whether playing football is a voluntary choice, there is lots that can be done to make it safer. And of course it's not really a "choice" for young kids who play the game. At any rate, NFL owners should not be making asinine public statements like the one Pegula made. The NFL pushed safer helmets back in the 90s...know who killed it? The Players. The NFL did not "hide" or "cover up" the risks. There is no secret study that the NFL killed. Players have access to as much information as the NFL has had. The players are the ones behind killing most of the safety proposals. The NFL adopted rules to reduce headshots...who complained? Fans and the players. The NFL has more of an interest in the game being as safe as possible to keep the product going than players and fans do...players want the biggest paycheck possible and thus they fight against rules to make the game safer because of the perception said measures would have on their performance.
Beast Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 If we have to explain it to you... Yeah, I do need an explanation. Do you have one as to why he is an idiot for saying this..... “I don’t like to talk about concussions publicly,” Pegula said, before talking about concussions in a way that downplays concussions in football. “Concussions happen in all parts of our society. It happens in every sport. You can be driving your car down the road and get a concussion in an accident. I don’t want to discuss the relevance of it in the football world.” Please explain what is so idiotic about that.
boyst Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 OMG OMG OMG OMG. SJW, quick! Form of angry mob! Go! Wow, what a horrible argument...a small step above TP, though.are we forcing players to play football? Concussions have long been a part of the game.There are lots of things that could be done differently, starting with more stringently enforcing the current rules designed to avoid head and neck injuries. Personally, i would adopt rugby tacking rules. Unlike some others, i do not believe it would negatively affect the product on the field. A lot of these guys just don't know how to tackle.head injuries went down when players went low. Players went low knee injuries rose. Players went high again and now head injuries are up. It's a contact sport. It's not for painty waists. It's not soccer. No, the players have not been "well aware of the risks"--scientists and doctors are still trying to get a handle on that, and the NFL played a disgraceful role in trying to cover up and/or downplay those risks. Regardless whether playing football is a voluntary choice, there is lots that can be done to make it safer. And of course it's not really a "choice" for young kids who play the game. At any rate, NFL owners should not be making asinine public statements like the one Pegula made.so, your argument of an evolving science with absolutely no conclusive evidence to determine the link between football and CTE is enough information to begin changing the game? What needs to be changed? Is it the micro concussions that are the issues? The big hits? The correlation of PED's causing players to be bigger and faster to do more damage? This crap that the science is conclusive on this is annoying. That is to say, any moron who understands the Earf is round should understand banging heads probably isn't smart. But, to go in to mass hysteria as an epidemic is hilarious. Society cares about these guys far more than they seem to themselves. All the while ignoring the folks who work dangerous jobs across the country.
QB Bills Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Water can be contaminated in so many different ways. The environment can be destroyed in so many different ways. I don't want to discuss the relevance of that when it comes to fracking.
4_kidd_4 Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Water can be contaminated in so many different ways. The environment can be destroyed in so many different ways. I don't want to discuss the relevance of that when it comes to fracking. I see what you did there.
chris heff Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Hm... He could have went with a different answer... Smacks of denial... Perhaps a little ignorance... All he had to say was that it's a worrisome issue, -the league is doing it's homework, -And he's looking forward to answers in the near future. Who's his PR Guy? Scaramucci
T-Bomb Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 (edited) The right answer is to not play football. Do the owners want that? Nope Do the players want that? Nope Do the agents wants that? Nope Do the NFL wives want that? Not if they want their husbands' money... Do the fans want that? Nope There is a right answer, it's just that no one wants to hear it. Edited August 7, 2017 by T-Bomb
LA Grant Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 (edited) Oof, bad quote from Terry. Especially because "car accident" is exactly the comparison CTE researchers always use — football contact is comparable to car accidents as far as impact on the brain, except you're probably not getting into thousands of car accidents per year for your hobby/job. And this is why Terry doesn't like to talk to the press! The right answer is to not play football. Do the owners want that? Nope Do the players want that? Nope Do the agents wants that? Nope Do the NFL wives want that? Not of they want their husbands' money... Do the fans want that? Nope There is a right answer, it's just that no one wants to hear it. Pretty much. Edited August 7, 2017 by LA Grant
What a Tuel Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 (edited) Wow, what a horrible argument...a small step above TP, though. So when Tom Brady says he is aware of the dangers, but still wants to play then it is the NFL's fault? You are saying they should say "No, Tom Brady, we are concerned for your health more than you are and override your voluntary choice to play football" I mean they can, but I don't think the decision should be taken out of players hands. If they want to do a hazardous job for amazing pay then why not? Edited August 7, 2017 by What a Tuel
Beast Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 The right answer is to not play football. Do the owners want that? Nope Do the players want that? Nope Do the agents wants that? Nope Do the NFL wives want that? Not of they want their husbands' money... Do the fans want that? Nope There is a right answer, it's just that no one wants to hear it. So, you aren't a big fan of personal choice, huh? Just because you like others telling you what to do doesn't mean others do.
Recommended Posts