5 Years later…for better or for worse?

Viewing 4 reply threads

- 09/20/2018 at 1:59 PM #68619
  3
  
  UtMtBiker
  Ute Fan
  
  @utmtbiker
  
  Posting because it’s bye week and why not.
  
  5 years ago the NFL settled a 750+ million dollar lawsuit with over 20,000 former players who alleged that the game was responsible for thier long term brain injuries. A year later a judge dertimined that the settelment was invalid that the NFL would need to provide over 1 billion dollars to cover the damages. At the time there was commentary that this was the kind of lawsuit that could kill the NFL and the football as a whole. In your oppinion how has the settlement affected the game? For the better..the worse?
  
  My thoughts:
  
  The hasty reaction by the NFL and NCAA to limit their liabilites moving forward has set the foundation for a game that will be unrecognizable as football 10 years from now. They’ve underestimated the importance of the physical aspect of the game and will continue to work towards making football the NBA 2.0.
  
  We’ve seen that the NCAA will fall in line with whatever the NFL implements. We’ve seen this with the kick off moving forward, followed by moving the ball to the 25 to eliminate incentive to return the kick. Prion to that we saw new roughting the passer rules and catch rules all implemented by the NFL and later picked up by the NCAA. In 3 years the NFL will eliminate kick-offs all together. The NCAA will follow. The only thing more watchable than this fair catch bull s**t would be not having a kick at all. The QB proction rules have have made it nearly impossible to hit the QB in the NFL. This year the NFL implemented a new rule making it a personal foul to fall on top on the QB. Defenders are required to try and roll to the side. This has been flagged 4 times in the first two weaks of the season including in the first quarter of the season opener. That wasn’t by luck, they wanted everyone to see it. Watch for this lame penalty being called against your team soon!
  
  NCAA football is the only sport in the world where a player can be kicked out of the game for single unintentional act. Furthermore, they used soccer as a model for the punishment making the player miss a potion of the following game. Now the outcome of a future game can be dertermined, in part, by a mistake (or bad call) in a previous game. A thought that is truley revolting to any old school football fan. Soccer?…f**k me!
  
  The increase in lower body injuries is an undeniable side effect of the push to protect players heads. The NFL rules committee considered penalizing hits on recievers below the waste when in the act of a catch. This would be an extention of the ambiguous “defensless reciever” rule. The rule change was tabled for further consideration when more data was available after the season ends. Once adopted the NCAA will likey piggy back on the rule and tack on the “targeting” designation to that one as well. Are we ready to see defenders stop in their tracks and allow a 25 crossing route to avoid a potential suspention? What happened to making the WR make a “business decision” about catching the ball or not? That’s a perfect example of the game changing. WR’s with no fear in crossing the middle? As someone who played football in the late 90s (even at a low level) this makes my skin crawl.
  
  When you consider that new research, albeit ignited by the NFL settelment, is pointing towards CTE as a genetic predisposition rather than purely a result of playing football it seems like the hasty reaction IS going to destroy the game as some predicted. Earlier this year a seemingly normal Jr. high school player had sevier CTE indication on autopsy. After playing a single year of football, his family is sueing the school district. Neurologists are disputing the possiblity of CTE from a single year of football.
  
  Could some sort of genetic testing alert players to their danger and allow players with resistant traits to continue to play the game the way it should be played? It’s unlikely.
  
  It’s more likely that we continue towards a softer, safer, more “athletic” game with higher scoring and less hitting. I, like Kyle Whittingham, am glad that I played and had the pleasure of being a football fan in a different erra. For the younger fans, enjoy this while you can because someday you’ll be a grouchy dude on a forum talking about the good old days.
- 09/20/2018 at 3:02 PM #68626
  1
  
  jamarcus24
  Ute Fan
  
  @jamarcus24
  
  Both. All these new safety rules to protect players has taken some of the enjoyment out of the game. I’m a Packer fan. Trust me, these new rules to protect the QB are ridiculous. And I say that knowing full well Aaron Rodgers is arguably the most protected QB in the league.
  
  On the other hand though, I remember a few years ago when the thought of implementing new rules to protect the players would hurt the game and overall viewership Herm Edwards said on NFL Live something like “12 billion dollars. End of story.”
  
  So worse for the viewership and the fan experience? You could probably say that. Is the NFL losing money? Doubt it. And that’s all the owners really care about. Here’s a good article showing that the NFL is doing just fine.
- 09/20/2018 at 3:16 PM #68629
  1 1
  
  Chidojuan
  Ute Fan
  
  @chidojuan
  
  Doterra might as well distill some bulls**t and market it to football players as a CTE preventing essential oil. It’s such a frustrating myth perpetuated on football and being run with by so many of these helicopter parents. I think there will be a regression to the mean in football, meaning that they’ll walk back some of these rules. A lot of people are going to complain about the review time we experienced in the Washington game. I also think that the Targeting penalty is going to come under heavy scrutiny this year. Not for anything that happened in the UW game. It will be something that comes out of the SEC bluebloods. A Targeting call is going to negate a scoop and score in the SEC that will cost a blueblood a win. Their boosters are going to go crazy and the NCAA is going to revise the penalty. Someone might even bring suit against the NCAA for it. If anything good comes out of the SEC, this will be it. I could be wrong of course, but I hope I’m right.
  - 09/20/2018 at 5:33 PM #68648
    
    snafu
    Ute Fan
    
    @snafu
    
    Are you saying CTE is a myth?
    - 09/20/2018 at 5:49 PM #68649
      3 3
      
      Chidojuan
      Ute Fan
      
      @chidojuan
      
      CTE caused by football is a myth.
      - 09/20/2018 at 7:46 PM #68662
        1 1
        
        Chidojuan
        Ute Fan
        
        @chidojuan
        
        Is it not a myth? Are there any accurate, substantiated studies on what causes it? I’m willing to have my mind changed, but the study conducted by the NFL was a completely biased sample. It’s not even clear at the moment that CTE is caused soley by trauma. If you’ve got some sources, I’m willing to listen.
    - 09/21/2018 at 8:36 AM #68697
      
      UtMtBiker
      Ute Fan
      
      @utmtbiker
      
      There is evidence that repeated low impact blows, such as those you would see everyday in drills in every practice around the country, are more damaging than infrequent high impact blows.
      - 09/21/2018 at 10:08 AM #68711
        2
        
        Chidojuan
        Ute Fan
        
        @chidojuan
        
        Is it confirmed that those will eventually lead to CTE though? Honest question. I can only find data about the NFL study, which was not done in a scientific manner at all. Also, is there a CTE backlash in UFC or boxing right now? I’m sure it’s been mentioned, but it doesn’t seem to have anywhere near the amount of coverage that CTE in football players does.
  - 09/21/2018 at 8:33 AM #68696
    
    UtMtBiker
    Ute Fan
    
    @utmtbiker
    
    What would be claim for said suit? Your rule cost us a game?….that could be every call in every game.
    - 09/21/2018 at 9:49 AM #68708
      
      Chidojuan
      Ute Fan
      
      @chidojuan
      
      Monetary loss in a civil suit. At least, that seems like the most likely scenario. Especially if there is a non call on a similar play that could call a penalty that was upheld into question. I could especially see it happening if the SEC had only one team in the playoff, and that team was eliminated because of the questionable call.
- 09/20/2018 at 3:18 PM #68630
  2 1
  
  EagleMountainUte
  Ute Fan
  
  @battlegroundute
  
  International rugby is the model like I have said a million times. They have implemented tons of rules that keep the integrity of the game while also putting player safety first.
  
  Football also needs to get rid of the hits. What I mean is WRAP UP not hit a player. You can’t tell me the hit FROM Blair was MORE dangerous than blowing up Covey not once but twice when he was completely defenseless. It isn’t just the blow to the head that causes a concussion. It is your brain bouncing around off your skull so when he falls to the ground it is the same thing. Defenseless hits where you can’t break yourself is what will eventually kill the game. I don’t want my kids playing Football or Rugby personally because it is unavoidable at times from getting a concussion.
  - 09/20/2018 at 4:30 PM #68639
    3 1
    
    GameForAnyFuss
    Ute Fan
    
    @gameforanyfuss
    
    ^This
    
    The best thing football could do is get rid of the pads. Make guys tackle the right way. Football is an entertaining enough game that it would still be fun without the “hits”.
  - 09/21/2018 at 8:43 AM #68698
    1
    
    UtMtBiker
    Ute Fan
    
    @utmtbiker
    
    But if “hitting” is removed from the game isn’t it essentially already dead? I mean, its still a game just not the same game. It will by more like Aussie rules or rugby. Fun-ish to watch but not exciting.
    - 09/21/2018 at 9:12 AM #68704
      
      GameForAnyFuss
      Ute Fan
      
      @gameforanyfuss
      
      I’m not prepared to address the difference in semantics between “fun-ish” and “exciting”. And personally I don’t understand why brutal hits and poor tackling technique make the game more exciting.
      
      But I do know that football has a participation and audience problem. Maybe making it more like rugby is what it needs? Rugby has 475 million fans… American football has about 275 million.
      - 09/21/2018 at 10:04 AM #68709
        1
        
        Chidojuan
        Ute Fan
        
        @chidojuan
        
        How can you measure that though? Seems to me that American Football is pretty cosmopolitan. I don’t know how you could accurately estimate fans.
        
        09/21/2018 at 3:57 PM #68744
        1 1
        
        EagleMountainUte
        Ute Fan
        
        @battlegroundute
        
        Blowing up smaller guys on a blindside crack back are not exciting. Now when Blair blows up lineman or full backs I can see that as impressive. I especially hated how the Washington players brag about that s**t.
        
        A nice open field tackle with a clean out resulting in a turnover? Rugby is the best sport in the world.
        
        09/21/2018 at 8:31 PM #68762
        
        ironman1315
        Ute Fan
        
        @ironman1315
        
        If ever football were to die, rugby is my got to no. 2. Especially 7s. Damn I love that game.
- 09/20/2018 at 3:35 PM #68634
  1
  
  SteelUte
  Ute Fan
  
  @steelute
  
  In addition, I would imagine the numbers of youth playing full contact football has dramatically decreased. Not only the rule changes will decrease the entertainment value and decrease attendance, viewership, but the lifeblood of the sport- youth playing the game and growing up to play in college and NFL will dramatically decrease. Less players = less teams, and more – less quality. It is sad, but I do see troubled times in the future. Could be 5 years, 10 years, maybe more. I really hope I’m wrong though.