(05-04-2018, 12:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Comparing Football players to coal miners is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. Football players are entertainers whose sole purpose to for the amusement of the paying fans. A coal miner might feel like he has to do the dangerous job to simply support his family.
But sure, go ahead an continue to make irrational comparisons and claim that they're logical.
no they are not entertainers.. They are Athletes... Arena gladiators... The mob just isn't as blood thirsty anymore... but we could be headed that direction.
Calling them Entertainers.. Puts them on a level of WWE... Which might be closer to the actual truth than anyone wants to admit.
(05-04-2018, 02:58 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: no they are not entertainers.. They are Athletes... Arena gladiators... The mob just isn't as blood thirsty anymore... but we could be headed that direction.
Calling them Entertainers.. Puts them on a level of WWE... Which might be closer to the actual truth than anyone wants to admit.
It's true. They play a game, for the purpose of raising money from spectators, sponsors, and fanatics. It's only because people want to watch and be entertained by the game, that the NFL even exists. If it weren't for so many people paying big money for their own entertainment pleasure, there would be no games on TV, no salaries, and certainly no rule changes simply to appease deep pocketed sponsors. Sounds like entertainment to me.
FWIW, I played adult football in leagues that had no pay. Guys were only there because they loved to play football.
Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations
(05-03-2018, 01:50 PM)sandwedge Wrote: The NFL,coaches are proposing some new rules to make the KO safer for players. (You can read it at the home page) The kicking team does not get a running head start anymore and the receiving team cannot move, till the ball is kicked. So does this eliminate the onside kick? Pretty soon I could almost see the elimination of it and give the ball at 25...
Makes me sick honestly. Women soccer players get concussions more often than anyone.
Players can get hurt on any given play, to take one of the most exciting plays in football out of the game could ruin the NFL.
(05-04-2018, 03:12 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: It's true. They play a game, for the purpose of raising money from spectators, sponsors, and fanatics. It's only because people want to watch and be entertained by the game, that the NFL even exists. If it weren't for so many people paying big money for their own entertainment pleasure, there would be no games on TV, no salaries, and certainly no rule changes simply to appease deep pocketed sponsors. Sounds like entertainment to me.
FWIW, I played adult football in leagues that had no pay. Guys were only there because they loved to play football.
What difference does it make if it is entertainment?
No one is going to stop watching NFL games because of anything that happens to the kick off. So why shouldn't they try to improve player safety?
(05-04-2018, 04:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So please list the top ten most exciting Bengal Kick off returns of the last 5 years.
I can't think of a single one. The kick off is pretty much meaningless to me.
To call it "One of the most exciting plays in football" is absurd.
I know Adam had quite a few that helped us win games and Erickson had one or two.
Until they started to try and take them out of the game. Returns have always been one of the most exciting plays in football before they started to try and take them out of the game and to say otherwise is absurd.
(05-04-2018, 05:01 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You asked, he delivered. So, now you want to move the goal post? You're on some kind of roll today...
It's a lawyer thing. Ask. Answer. Not what I wanted the jury or myself to hear, belittle the answer and redirect. Entertaining to read it on a Bengals msg board.
So basically this would eliminate the onside kick, thus if a team is down 9 has no chance of winning the game in the last 3-5 minutes. There would be no point in playing out the game unless you eliminate kneel downs and force the winning team to run plays with the clock stopping after every play......Then it may be feasible.
(05-04-2018, 05:07 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: It's a lawyer thing. Ask. Answer. Not what I wanted the jury or myself to hear, belittle the answer and redirect. Entertaining to read it on a Bengals msg board.
Please show me this top ten list that I asked for.
(05-04-2018, 05:09 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: So basically this would eliminate the onside kick, thus if a team is down 9 has no chance of winning the game in the last 3-5 minutes. There would be no point in playing out the game unless you eliminate kneel downs and force the winning team to run plays with the clock stopping after every play......Then it may be feasible.
That is why it needs to be exactly like a punt.
Give the team 4th and 10 (or 15) at their own 35. They can either punt or go for it.
(05-04-2018, 05:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is why it needs to be exactly like a punt.
Give the team 4th and 10 (or 15) at their own 35. They can either punt or go for it.
Avg. NFL punt is 45yds and it takes around 20 yds for a player reach full speed. Players are still going to be running at full speed when they hit the ball carrier.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
Makes me sick honestly. Women soccer players get concussions more often than anyone.
