"Are high schoolers risking their lives for a chance out of poverty or a sense of elevated status really 'playing'? Are those who take the field in the NCAA, exploited for billions of dollars in television revenue while working in a state of indentured servitude, 'playing'? Are the NFL athletes who have to treat every single play as a potential threat to their brains, and get an average of three and a half years on the field, 'playing'? The only people 'playing' in this scenario are egomaniacal coaches and parents, craven NCAA thought leaders, and NFL executives, all preaching intensity and sacrifice, but really just playing with the lives of others. They are the sports equivalent of the Bush-era chickenhawks. Note how many big-time basketball coaches have kids who play hoops and note how few football coaches can say the same."
That's Dave Zirin in The Nation: "Why Does Anybody Play Football Anymore?/Football has never been more popular. And it has never felt less like a game."
Yes, that's a bit extreme and over-politicized, but I'm interested in the precedence given to "play," the different meanings of "play," and the work/play distinction.
There seems to be an assumption that if something is a game, it should be play and not work. You should be having fun, not striving and struggling, not using it as a way to get money. But what's bad about having a serious, hard-working mindset in sports? There's no corresponding assumption that those of us who are doing jobs that are not games shouldn't feel that we are at play, having fun, feeling joy that's disconnected from the money we're making.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०२ टिप्पण्या:
There are people who hate competitiveness. I don't think games are enjoyable if people are not taking them seriously enough to play at their best. A few people who are just there "to have fun" and are not playing well as a result can ruin it for the people who really enjoy doing their best.
My theory is that if you build a stadium, then you are committed to that structure. In order to fill the seats you need a violent enough sport that some will actually die trying to move the game ball.
It's like getting killed, or breaking bones in a riot, only there are rules.
Ah, but the trick is to break the rule and not get caught. That's the American way. If one of the convicts in the baseball hat doesn't see you do it, it didn't happen, even if an ambulance is required to remove the carcass.
God loves football.
Just because you work hard at something doesn't mean it isn't "play". The fact is that football is still a game, played for entertainment. Just because some people take the game seriously or even decided to depend on it for their livelihood--I'm not aware of any enslaved football players--doesn't mean it is not a game.
And the article writer sounds like a real boor. I wonder, does he include Hillary Clinton as one of those "chickenhawks" considering she's the only major party candidate who never served in the military but did vote for the Iraq War (among other wars)? Is he planning to not support her as a result of this? If not he can enjoy a tall glass of STFU as his "chickenhawk" comment is clearly a case of "pacifist only when Republicans are doing it" and we need not worry about anything else coming from his addled brain.
The big problem with football and it's damaging effects is the helmet and pads. While intended to protect, it creates an incentive to hit harder and use the helmet as a weapon against the other players and, in turn, injures the player inflicting the damage just as often. The more protection you offer, the more reckless and risky the play becomes.
If you look at rugby, the game football evolved from, there are no helmets or pads, yet I find the game more exciting and interesting.
If you want to fix football. eliminate the hard-shell helmet or replace it with a soft-shell helmet. This will discourage players from using it as a weapon and it will reduce the need for pads, too.
Coupe, how can you explain the massive crowds that go out to see soccer and rugby around the world and the large stadiums built to accomodate the crowds?
PB, great idea. Rugby is tremendously unsuccessful in America. Maybe we can replace American football with rugby.
Then nobody will use their competitive advantages against opponents.
For goodness sake, we've never seen that in soccer.
What we really need is a government program.
Does anybody 'write' anymore?
Are high school 'journalists' who carefully craft articles for their school paper to pad their resumes for college applications really 'writing'? Are interns at newspapers and TV news studios, exploited for billions of dollars in ad revenues while working in a state of indentured servitude 'writing'? Are the professional journalist who have to treat every article as a risk of making powerful enemies and losing their precious access really 'writing'?
The only people 'writing' in these scenarios are the fat-cat publishing-company owners all preaching the value of openness and speaking truth to power but really just playing fast and loose with the truth.
"Yes, that's a bit extreme and over-politicized, but I'm interested in the precedence given to "play,""
OK, so another Prog launches another over-the-top attack on bourgeois taste and American culture, with the tritest of trite tropes from the history of sports, so sure, let's all focus on the important stuff and think about the "precedence given to "play,""
@PB, that's not quite right. It is how the game of football is played, esp. the forward pass, that makes helmets and pads necessary. A quarterback who steps back and scans the field for someone to pass to needs protection in case he gets blindsided. A receiver who runs a route without the ball and leaps to catch it without seeing the player that's about to hit him needs protection. Pretty simple, really.
If football were just snapping the ball and running with it like rugby with short laterals, then helmets and pads wouldn't be necessary.
"Note how many big-time basketball coaches have kids who play hoops and note how few football coaches can say the same."
Is the author just bullshitting here or does he back this statement up?
"Note how many big-time basketball coaches have kids who play hoops and note how few football coaches can say the same."
Note where? Good grief that's lazy reporting. "Note my fact free assertion." Noted.
That said, I would strongly discourage my kids from playing football, which is easy to do since they would rather draw, read, and play computer games. I would be happy to see football transition to more of a flag construct.
I guess Peyton and Eli Manning don't count because their father was not a coach. On the other hand Terry and Tommy Bowden (Bobby Bowden's sons) were just coaches and didn't play in the NFL so they are probably excluded from this analysis also.
I'm betting that there are a significant number of players in the NFL who are related to former NFL players. I know at the college level that being the son of a football-playing alumnus gets you several looks.
It is not "play" or "sports" when the owners pay bonuses for injuring the players on the opposing team.
Gabriel said...
There are people who hate competitiveness.
This isn't the driver. The left hates anything that brings traditional Americans together. They hate football in particular because it competes for attention and money in their own institutions (academia and media). For example they hate baseball far less because even though universities have teams it has a fraction of the attendance and interest football does.
Most high school football players know that they are never going to play another game after Senior Night. They are doing it to get social status and to bang cheerleaders. The fact that dad is living vicariously through them doesn't hurt either. The permissiveness that they earn for misdeeds in school is just a side benefit.
Why, it's almost as if the word "play" could have multiple meanings, so that "Little Sue plays with Tommy" and "Lebron James plays with Kevin Love" don't mean quite the same thing! Astonishing. What will Dave Zirin discover next?
...as opposed to Obama-era chickenhawks.
How many soldiers died in Afghanistan under Obama's watch? Oh, right--it's OK; he's a Democrat.
Soccer is a strange game. They don't even know what to call it outside of America.
And it apparently earns a pretty penny, even though the players are not allowed to use the most fantastic devices they have on their bodies, their own hands and arms!.
Soccer is a leftist con.
(By the way, I have coached soccer for several years. Offside? Please make a rule, and please do away with that rule, you stupid twits. And clock? Can anyone on the field, even in the world cup, have a clue how much time there might be on the clock? Is someone running for the goal or something?)
PB said...
Coupe, how can you explain the massive crowds that go out to see soccer and rugby around the world and the large stadiums built to accomodate the crowds?
With soccer, the violence takes place in the stands, or out on the streets.
Soccer is a game made for people who don't know what games are. Whoosh and yell all you want. You people don't know where the game is.
Untold tens of thousands (perhaps hundreds of thousands) of American high school boys play football. Not all of them are trying to escape poverty by a long shot. They like the game and jocks get the first pick of girls.
If you add up all of the college football players, the total is in the thousands depending if you limit it to Division 1 schools or count everyone. There's a thick drop off from the numbers that play college ball compared to high school. There simply aren't as many teams. By no means do all of the college football players get a free ride scholarship. It's probably less than 30%. Of all the college players, only about 200-300 get picked up by NFL teams each year and they know it. So, with little chance of a scholarship and less of getting to play professionally, why do college players suit up? Could it be they enjoy playing the game and still like getting first pick of the girls?
Now, the NFL is a business. The players there may still enjoy the game but they see it as a job, mostly. Most of their careers are short and the chances of being injured, perhaps permanently, are about 100%. The minimum salary for an NFL player is around $500,000 which is pretty good money but a lot of players don't even last a single season. The guys like Peyton Manning who have long careers and rake in really big bucks are the rare exceptions.
Soccer is the stupidest sport imaginable. It couldn't have taken more than 10 minutes to invent. Take the ball and kick it towards a goal.
I like football, but find it increasingly difficult to watch on TV. Penalties which take time to sort out, seemingly endless replays and commercial breaks. It takes too long too watch as game, and more and more of that time is not the game being played.
The best of football is behind us.
The Nation ? The Nation ?
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Ask them about trannies in bathrooms but football ? HAHAHAHAHA
PB said......can you explain the massive crowds that go out to see soccer and rugby around the world and the large stadiums built to accommodate the crowds?
Pari Mutuel
Anyone who played a high school varsity sport for a coach with career ambitions knows it's not a game, at least to him. That doesn't make it wrong or bad, but it's not about "playing" or recreation. It's serious stuff. It's one of the things I liked about the movie "Hoosiers".
Any game that is played for money is a business and not a "sport."
BDNYC said...Soccer is the stupidest sport imaginable. It couldn't have taken more than 10 minutes to invent. Take the ball and kick it towards a goal.
Ah yes, but millions of Euro's change hands every hour.
I heard Dave Zirin speak in Berkeley 5 years ago, before I knew or understood who he is.
He's essentially a Bernie Sanders socialist, who is utterly clueless about the real world. His main focus was on how beautiful Title 9 was because all these girls could now play soccer.
He's right! Girl soccer up to age 13 or so, is a wonderful thing. However, it's a pretty narrow slice of the ENTIRE sports spectrum, Dave.
High school and college football are glorious -- the NFL has some problems, but it's pretty glorious too. Zirin and his ilk demand more female punters or something -- we don't need any such nonsense from Beta male socialists:)
Re soccer, Bob Ellison said "even though the players are not allowed to use the most fantastic devices they have on their bodies, their own hands and arms!."
When I watch soccer (and I watch it frequently), I see more grabbing, pushing, shoving and elbowing than in any sport except football. All with the hands and arms.
"PB said...
Coupe, how can you explain the massive crowds that go out to see soccer and rugby around the world and the large stadiums built to accomodate the crowds?"
Easy. The don't have American football.
Just because billions eat bugs doesn't mean a rib-eye isn't better.
I've read some essays by Zirin in the past and have occasionally found agreement with him. But he stands foursquare with The Nation and all the nonsense they espouse.
This is not one of his better efforts.
Football is a great physical outlet for many kids, especially boys. Not hard to see why it's popular in America.
Oakeshott developed the definitive account of the work/play distinction: http://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/06/003-work-and-play
It's The Nation.
What does one expect?
Progressives hate anything masculine. Period.
Note how many big-time basketball coaches have kids who play hoops and note how few football coaches can say the same.
Most really good football players tend to have coaches in their family. And most don't discuss their young kids kid's football leagues.
By the way, I have coached soccer for several years. Offside? Please make a rule, and please do away with that rule, you stupid twits. And clock? Can anyone on the field, even in the world cup, have a clue how much time there might be on the clock? Is someone running for the goal or something?
That's one of my big pet peeves. Part of the NFL's fun is watching a team scrambling to come back against a relentless clock that, when it hits zero, the game is over. Ditto basketball. Adding an ADDITIONAL opponent (time) to the game amplifies the drama.
Soccer ends when the referee decides it is over. Where is the drama in that?
The Progressives love the Australian model of gun confiscation. Australia was in the finals of the World Cup Rugby. They played New Zealand, another Prog fav. Why do we not have articles in The Nation discussing the tendency, the DNA, of violence in these societies based on their fascination with this terribly brutal sport?
The difference between work and play is commitment and responsibility.
The great thing about my job as a scientist developing new imaging systems was I got to play with complex, really expensive equipment. I loved my days in the lab.
PB said: "If you look at rugby, the game football evolved from, there are no helmets or pads, yet I find the game more exciting and interesting."
Me too. The recently completed Rugby World Cup was fantastic.
Michael said...
The Progressives love the Australian model of gun confiscation. Australia was in the finals of the World Cup Rugby. They played New Zealand, another Prog fav. Why do we not have articles in The Nation discussing the tendency, the DNA, of violence in these societies based on their fascination with this terribly brutal sport?
I hear the Australians say, 'only pooftahs need guns or helmets'.
I think Althouse said, "It's about the money!" If she didn't, I will, "It's about the money!"
The media attention, particularly now that The Nation has weighed in, may mean that football will become a new target of the SJWs. After all, it is racist to have a disproportionate number of black men escaping the plantation by playing this high risk game even if they are paid good money for doing so.
Presumably fishing and logging, both high risk jobs, will come under fire if any preferred Democrat voting class moves in those directions. Police work, not so much. Lefty cognitive dissonance requires denial that members of their preferred classes are employed as cops.
Soccer is great. It is odd that they haven't yet linked the ref's hand-timed "stoppage time" (whenever play is stopped, the ref stopwatches it) to the TV/arena clock display. But rest assured that the amount of non-stopped play time does total 45 minutes in each half.
What's interesting (or dull, depending on POV) about hockey and soccer is that goals happen infrequently but randomly - in flashes of brilliance (or defensive failures) - and even then most good shots are saved by a goalie. Maybe soccer could use some power plays. Big plays aside, football has more of a slow build toward scoring climax (w/ plenty of commercial breaks)
I played twelve years of football, from 2nd grade through a year of college. While there was a bit of "meta" in junior and senior year, with the possibilities of scholarships, I never once considered the NFL a realistic path. I played because I loved the game and everything around.
Except running laps. I hated running laps.
But there's no other sport like it. People complain of the static nature, unlike the more flowing hockey and rugby, but that's really the point. Just as there is that pause and tension before each pitch in baseball, there is a pause an tension before each and every snap.
Loved the game and am raising my kids to love it.
PS - Can't stand fantasy football despite my having been both an avid football player and an avid D&D player in my youth :)
That's like asking why Gladiators don't quit playing the coliseum because so many get hurt.
That's the whole idea. The Games are a public bloodletting of sorts.
I like football, but find it increasingly difficult to watch on TV. Penalties which take time to sort out, seemingly endless replays and commercial breaks. It takes too long too watch as game, and more and more of that time is not the game being played.
I understand that sentiment. All you have to do is go to your local high school on Friday night. Better yet, if you can find a semi-pro team (they're NEVER televised, lol), now that's a fun night out. And cheap.
I'm actually blessed that we moved into a school district that's not only tops in the area/state in academics, but has a championship football team years running.
American "football" should properly be called "grab-ball."
Scott M said...
People complain of the static nature, unlike the more flowing hockey and rugby, but that's really the point.
Resetting fosters the strategy of the game. It's a fantastic combination of physical and mental no other sport can match.
Jonathan Graehl said...
What's interesting (or dull, depending on POV) about hockey and soccer is that goals happen infrequently but randomly
The difficulty in scoring is a drawback for both soccer and Hockey. Critics of Americans relative disinterest in soccer claim say they have a simplistic desire for more scoring because they are ignorant of the underlying positioning for advantage. But in truth the extreme difficulty in scoring even off a good opportunity means the game result is less determined by performance than by luck. Both sports would be better off if tactical advantages more reliably resulted in scores.
I knew some guys who joined elite units in the service not because they were especially patriotic or because they wanted to gut a few of those commie bastards. They joined because that's who they were. Different people are attracted to different degrees of risk. Some people like to compete in x sports and some people like to play football. Let them play........Women's gymnastic is an organized form of child abuse. A fair number of these kids suffer crippling injuries. What are the chances that the Nation would expose the risks and venality of big time woman's gymnastics?
The big problem with football and it's damaging effects is the helmet and pads
This is part of the problem, but not the biggest part.
The biggest problem is that players are larger and stronger than ever.
Remember Refrigerator Perry? He became a star because of his weight. He weighed about 330 pounds. Today the average defensive lineman weighs over 300 pounds.
The same thing is happening on down the line....college and high school players are bigger than ever.
The only way to fix the problem is to put size restrictions on all levels of football, like they do Pop Warner. Of course then you will have lawsuits.
Someone who got picked last, and sucked at every sport. Zirin finally had to let all that angst out...
The difficulty in scoring is a drawback for both soccer and Hockey. Critics of Americans relative disinterest in soccer claim say they have a simplistic desire for more scoring because they are ignorant of the underlying positioning for advantage.
I can attest that many of these same "critics of Americans" will slam baseball, where a 1-0 game is the ultimate because "nothing happens" and will praise cricket, where, right now for example, India is leading South Africa 208 to 28, India having finished 10 overs, and SA in the 2nd. You have to have a decent foundation in statistics to follow the graphs they show during a cricket match, BTW.
My son told me that he’ll not allow my grandson play football. I approve that decision. Long term, the game has a problem that will not go away: The physical toll. If parents give up on the game the game will die. Slowly perhaps, but die it will.
It’s not just the concussions – it’s also the ruined knees, busted ankles, shoulders, ribs, etc. And this can happen before the player leaves junior high school. The game is too violent.
The NFL is now trying to figure out how to set rules to limit injuries without eliminating the violent essence of the game. I think that is an impossible task. There will be other lawsuits, other verdicts, other judgements. Watered-down, safer football will not have the same appeal as the current game.
The school systems, from first grade through college, are serving as gladiator training organizations. They get their cut of the money involved and will not give it up easily but if they have no players to play it’s all over for them.
If you look at rugby, the game football evolved from, there are no helmets or pads, yet I find the game more exciting and interesting.
American football may be safer than rugby. A key finding in a recent study:
The same Auckland University of Technology report showed American football resulting in 1.0 catastrophic incidents per every 100,000 players between 1975 and 2005. That’s more than 75% fewer incidents than the index tallied in rugby.
http://tinyurl.com/oe6npxt
There needs to be studies that are more definitive. For instance, the injury reporting mechanisms for the two games need to be evaluated and taken into account.
The players are suffering a "false consciousness," they only think they love the game and enjoy playing.
American football may be safer than rugby. A key finding in a recent study:
I got more injuries playing rugby than football, but the football injuries were usually more serious.
about hockey and soccer is that goals happen infrequently but randomly
There's about five seconds before a goal, usually, when you can see it developing. Sure lots of times they misfire on a scoring chance, but when a score happens, it is usually not a complete surprise.
Football as we knew it is over. Finished. The game will change to accommodate the health risks. It will have to.
I enjoy soccer a lot more now. I find the game very interesting — the movement of the players, the ability of players to kick a ball 30 yards right to a specific spot on the field where another players takes a soft touch and can control the ball.
You have to watch good soccer, though. The MLS is largely a minor league.
The beauty of soccer isn't in the scoring. I find even the misses can be exciting. And goals do not certainly happen randomly. You could read a ton about soccer strategy and tactics.
"I hear the Australians say, 'only pooftahs need guns or helmets'."
That's the Australians you talk to. Come on, have you ever talked to anyone but a lefty ?
It’s not just the concussions – it’s also the ruined knees, busted ankles, shoulders, ribs, etc. And this can happen before the player leaves junior high school. The game is too violent.
The problem with this thinking is that like anything else, you have to worry about the slippery slope. Parents are complaining already about baseball players getting beaned (intentionally or not), wood bats vs. aluminum bats, etc. Hockey has an issue with concussions that they didn't have when players weren't wearing helmets, etc.
All sports are dangerous and can be violent. The logical conclusion of all of this thinking is the banning of all sports. And don't think for a minute there isn't a segment of society (including the moron who wrote the article in question) who thinks that way.
Football has become less violent over the last thirty years due to rule changes. The players are larger and faster than thirty years ago.
The last study I read indicated that ex-pro football players are healthier and live longer than the people in the stands. I also seem to remember that most amiture football deaths are heart related, not from taking hits.
Hockey has an issue with concussions that they didn't have when players weren't wearing helmets,
They probably weren't being diagnosed properly.
However, the less padding one has the less risks one would take. Too much helmet-design and pad engineering has made the game more violent.
I got more injuries playing rugby than football, but the football injuries were usually more serious.
Rugby players rarely leave their feet to stop the other team. That's the major difference. They tackle as opposed to hit.
Pretty soon football will become an underground sport, like Fight Club.
You know about Fight Club, right?
It's ... oh, wait.
Rule number 1. And numbers 2 and 3 ...
"American football may be safer than rugby. A key finding in a recent study:"
I don't believe it. There's a lot of blood in rugby, but people are carted off the field much less frequently.
"Rugby players rarely leave their feet to stop the other team. That's the major difference. They tackle as opposed to hit."
That, and there is no forward pass. A lot of football's really bad injuries occur to receivers and pass defenders.
Original Mike said...
"American football may be safer than rugby. A key finding in a recent study:"
I don't believe it. There's a lot of blood in rugby, but people are carted off the field much less frequently.
11/5/15, 1:34 PM
I agree. Having played both rugby and American football, my observation is that in rugby you are more likely to suffer a broken nose or tooth, in American football you are more likely to break a leg or get a concussion.
I'd rather break a leg than a tooth. The leg will heal.
Meanwhile my nephew plays rugby. He is in something called the scrum. He has to tape his ears to keep them from being ripped off. Yah, safe and harmless, you betcha.
There's a sense of comradely with high school football, you have a connection for life. I just don't think you get that going to band camp. Oh, and Steve, I'm sorry the football players got all the girls and you were left massterbating in the bathroom.
Did the writer ever compete--really compete--at anything? Picture two lawyers in their late 20's--working as associates at a big firm--playing racquetball against each other. These were normally mild mannered guys--but after a while the games got deadly. The scores of each game were close--on the order of 21-18 or 21-19-- but one fellow built up a long winning streak. The intensity got so bad that a partner ultimately ordered that the two stop playing each other. The desire to keep on beating the other guy--or the desire of the fellow who just couldn't quite get even one win in--was destroying their friendship.
I know--I was there--and the other player in that pair passed on to his eternal reward a year or two ago. We were still friends--but we wouldn't have been if we'd kept on playing each other (and I was on the losing end of that streak).
Competition is usually healthy. And you see it in all sorts of places and activities. As Hyman Rickover (no hero of mine) told Jimmy Carter--then a young naval officer (and also no hero of mine), "Why not the best?" That goes with the Teutons as well--since the Mercedes slogan--coming from its founder--is "Das Beste oder Nichts", i.e. "The best--or nothing."
Real men (and real women) know how to compete. They love to compete. Wussies write stupid articles.
It’s not just the concussions – it’s also the ruined knees, busted ankles, shoulders, ribs, etc. And this can happen before the player leaves junior high school. The game is too violent.
Know what school sport is more damaging?
Cheerleading. Injury numbers THERE would curl toes.
Gymnastics also routinely blows out knees, ankles, and shoulders.
"Gymnastics also routinely blows out knees, ankles, and shoulders."
I broke my back in college in gymnastics. Three level compression fracture. I showed my x-rays 25 years later to a neurosurgeon friend and he said, "Don't complain, You should be paraplegic."
I don't complain.
...how can you explain the massive crowds that go out to see soccer and rugby around the world and the large stadiums built to accomodate the crowds?
Same way I explain President Obama.
Watching soccer makes watching paint dry look like watching football.
Playing sports is a grueling endeavor that teaches one about life, and the idea that sports should be fun is a red-headed stepchild from the happy days of the 60s and 70s.
Wars for control of the world were first won on the playing fields of Eton, as I recall.
I was a 155 pound center and middle linebacker. And I have to say, football was a blast to play. I only played in junior high and high school. But I enjoyed it. It was an amazing amount of hard work. But at that age, I need a sport where I could be aggressive and strategic. I played some other sports but none with the passion of football.
Reflecting back, the sport is dangerous - not just hazardous. It's brutal on the body and especially the head. If you played, you'll likely know you played the rest of your life. For me, though, I've never regretted playing. I learned some of my best life lessons playing football. There must be a way to make football safer while still allowing for toughness.
"My son told me that he’ll not allow my grandson play football. I approve that decision. Long term, the game has a problem that will not go away: The physical toll. If parents give up on the game the game will die. Slowly perhaps, but die it will.
It’s not just the concussions – it’s also the ruined knees, busted ankles, shoulders, ribs, etc. And this can happen before the player leaves junior high school. The game is too violent."
***************
I suspect millions of Americans will adopt those same rationales to discourage their sons not to join the military.
All those injuries! all those messy deaths!
ICK.
Our days as a Great Nation are nearly over. Only a few million more PUSSIES needed to finish us off.
The 3.5 year average career length in the NFL is a flawed stat. That figure is accurate if you take all the drafted players and count them. If you are a rookie on a roster on opening day, your career is more like 7 years.
Why again does anyone read The Nation?
"American "football" should properly be called "grab-ball.""
Football was the generic terms used for all games involving a ball that were played on foot way back when most of these sports were being invented. Rugby, soccer, American football, Gaelic football, and Australian rules football all fall under this broad term. Hell, were handball invented earlier it would probably be considered a form of football.
At The Nation, I believe the assumption is more that if something is a game, it should be abolished.
traditionalguy: The thing about the gladiators is while the popular image is of slaves forced into the life, a large portion of the fighters were volunteers. Successful gladiators were very well paid and got the girls. So, yes, people are willing to risk quite a lot for fame, money, and sex. If someone made a "game" that involved a 50% chance of dying a slow, horrible death and a 50% chance of getting rich and rotating supermodels on the bed on a daily basis, there would be plenty of volunteers.
Now as to the entire sport vs. business debate, which has raged on for centuries if not longer and has involved Supreme Court decisions, football is both. Some are in it for the benefits (money, etc.), some are in it for the sport, and some are in it for both. My guess the last is the majority.
The thing is that any job that pays a lot of money is going to attract people who like the money. If you go back to the fledgling days of professional team sports - 19th century baseball - most of the players were farm boys, coal miners, and the like. While they were not well paid by today's standards, and for that matter were usually underpaid even for their time, the amount of money they were making playing baseball was usually a whole lot more than they could ever expect to earn otherwise. It was the difference between being poor and middle class (or, at least, not poor), the difference between being able to start a business rather than going back into those mines, the difference between the (usually brief) high life and the mundane. Athletes have always been looking out to make the big score. There are many examples of privileged athletes pursuing the sport because they want to for non-financial reasons, but, yes, professional sports has always attracted to those who want to walk on easy street. (It is amusing in 19th century baseball to read about players who retired so they could become better paid doctors, lawyers, or businessmen, or retired because they married into a wealthy family that thought baseball was too low class. Times have changed.)
Zirin seems to be amazed by basic and ancient human nature. I find it baffling that such a person would be chosen to opine on topic of the day.
"Long term, the game has a problem that will not go away:"
My grandson has played baseball since T ball. He is now 10. His parents found out a month ago he has asthma and is allergic to grass.
Too bad they didn't start him swimming. Many swimmers are asthmatic.
He'll go through the desensitization routine but how well it will work is still to be seen.
They all have problems. Title IX killed off most minor men's sports in college.
There are many great sportswriters and this airhead keeps quoting the scribe from the mofo Nation Magazine! He's a buffoon. He hates sports, so does this bimbo.
This bimbo was mentioned in the liberal Isthmus today about handguns in campus buildings. She is opposed. She wouldn't return their calls. What a fading diva.
Dave Zirin loves the politics of The Nation a lot more than he cares anything about sports; any sport.
I am surprised and disappointed in Professor Althouse, trolling her readers with Dave Zirin.
Down on the farm we did indeed 'play' football. It was outrageous fun, thinking up strategies against one another and using our growing physical capabilities to the limit. It became even more outrageous fun when played in a field of standing cornstalks with the participation of four or five dogs, all of which got more excited than we did at the crashing and running, and barked and bit at the players and each other just to help things along.
Thank God the 21st century and its poisonous PC theories of collective urban angst had not yet been invented, and pray that somewhere there's still a cornfield with just such chaos going on right now.
Oh, I like this thread. Lots of people have already said everything I could say, and better, but you know me, I'm going to pile on anyway (get it? ...it's a football metaphor!).
1. It's a game. Duh. Guys like to play it. Duh.
Moreover, it's THE MOST PRIMAL GAME OF ALL! Lions and cheetahs. That's what makes it awesome. Be glad there's no blood and ripping of flesh from bones with sharp teeth after each tackle.
2. Football is a tough game for tough guys. The current ongoing attempt to (who put it this way) "not let one's son play the game" because... danger!... broken bones!... is a continuation of the ever increasing pussification (feminization, war on males, etc.) of America.
3. I've said this before: when "The Decline and Fall of America" gets written, one of the chapters will be titled "Soccer Moms and Their Precious Little Boys", or something like that.
4. High school football players are no different from any other random group of people you could gather in any given high school. They are no more privileged, no more able to "land" the chicks, no more self-assured, no more anything. That's a myth that non-athletes (English majors who write fiction and make movies) tell themselves to assume the victim pose. I know this for a fact.
One other thing: soccer would be a lot better without goalies.
Imagine basketball with Shaq standing all game long in front of a basketball goal.
The 49ers aren't "playing" for damn sure.
Zirin is a sports writer that, seemingly, never writes about, you know, the GAME. Every single thing is about the sports world's wealthy exploiting the poor, racism - Lord yes the racism of it all, sexism and spousal abuse and on and on.....
Sure, there is that in sports, as with nearly every endeavor. But to only focus on that.... hell he could be a writer about the evils of dentistry, or education, or mass transit systems. I find it more than a bit pathetic.
Yet these same parents will let their sons drive cars. My son does both and I know which one scares me more.
Football is invaluable in teaching certain life lessons.
BN said...
because... danger!... broken bones!...
My son doesn't play football, not much of a program in our small town. He plays lacrosse ( broken hand ) and soccer ( broken hip ).
About the only thing he really hated about the broken bones was that they (temporarily) stopped him from playing lacrosse and soccer.
"That's Dave Zirin in The Nation: "Why Does Anybody Play Football Anymore?/Football has never been more popular. And it has never felt less like a game."
Dave Zirin is a loser. He got his ass kicked in football and he hates the people that do what it takes to win and value winning. That is why he is a journalist. Communications degrees have almost no academic standards and working hard wont really do much for you. It is more about thinking right and knowing people.
I don't play football. I'm too delicate. That being said, let people,who want to play, play. There will continue to be injuries, but life is life.there liberals go again trying to child proof the world.
We certainly know which nation writer probably never played sports in his life. He probably has similar feeling on boxing, martial arts, mms, wrestling, rugby and all sorts of other activities that might lead to injury.
My kid and his friends care a lot more about European soccer, and in particular the English Premier League, than the NFL. When the preference cascade for soccer really gets going, it will probably be the end of American football.
"...it will probably be the end of American football."
One word too many.
Skookum, we've heard about soccer's "burgeoning popularity" for over 30 years now.
It isn't going to break thru.
That's a good phrase, "the preference cascade".
Movements like Marxism, Naziism, feminism, and the current one that I would call shitism do have a cascade-like quality. You fall for the movement and slide down the hill.
David Zirin is a douche.
All players in organised sports know from 5th grade to college that only the cream rises to the next level. There are a few who don't get it, like the nice gay player from Missouri. Life is full of disappointments, the next level weeds out the pretenders. I suspect Zirin still believes he was robbed somewhere along the line in little league.
I played football in HS and never found it the least bit dangerous, outside of a few sprains and bruises. Skiing is a more dangerous sport than Football.
Today, its more safe than ever, yet we get more weenies whining about its dangers than ever before.
Jeff, Band camp was awesome.
The Left doesn't like football. Too war-like, too masculine, too many Southerners love it and swear by it, too many multi-millionaire owners, too many attractive female cheerleaders, too much beer -- in other words, what an awesome American sport!
Tonight, taking my teenager and his buds to see, arguably, the best high school team in the country, De La Salle of Concord, CA whip somebody's butt.
Friday Night Lights, baby!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा