Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:07 am

jazzcyclist wrote:Here's a question for you and Marlow. How do you compare folks like Bob Hayes and Jess Owens to today's sprinters? Would they be able to compete with Tyson Gay, Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell if they had been born in the 1980's? I say yes for the same reasons that I say the old time football players would be able to compete, but you might have other ideas?

Both Owens and Hayes were genetic freaks - WAY ahead of their times (as is Bolt today). Hayes could certainly sprint today and he'd still be a huge receiver threat in the pros. Owens wouldn't be in the league with Bolt or Gay, but yeah, he could hang. But they were head and shoulders (and torso) ahead of their peers.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:25 am

Marlow wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Here's a question for you and Marlow. How do you compare folks like Bob Hayes and Jess Owens to today's sprinters? Would they be able to compete with Tyson Gay, Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell if they had been born in the 1980's? I say yes for the same reasons that I say the old time football players would be able to compete, but you might have other ideas?

Both Owens and Hayes were genetic freaks - WAY ahead of their times (as is Bolt today). Hayes could certainly sprint today and he'd still be a huge receiver threat in the pros. Owens wouldn't be in the league with Bolt or Gay, but yeah, he could hang. But they were head and shoulders (and torso) ahead of their peers.

I knew I would get through to you eventually. You've used a good phrase - "genetic freak". The genetic freaks from the days of yore would be bigger, faster and stronger genetic freaks if they had been around today since they would have had the same generational advantages as today's athletes. For example, I don't think that Trindon Holliday would be able to beat Bob Hayes in the 100 meters if Hayes was around today, despite the fact that Holliday has run faster that Hayes's PR on numerous occasions. Similarly, Jim Brown was a genetic freak and if his clone were born today, he would be bigger than 6'2" - 232 and faster than 4.5s.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:33 am

jazzcyclist wrote:I knew I would get through to you eventually. You've used a good phrase - "genetic freak". The genetic freaks from the days of yore would be bigger, faster and stronger genetic freaks if they had been around today since they would have had the same generational advantages as today's athletes. For example, I don't think that Trindon Holliday would be able to beat Bob Hayes in the 100 meters if Hayes was around today, despite the fact that Holliday has run faster that Hayes's PR on numerous occasions. Similarly, Jim Brown was a genetic freak and if his clone were born today, he would be bigger than 6'2" - 232 and faster than 4.5s.

I was never 'inaccessible'. Simple logic works every time! :D
I agree that Hayes would beat Holliday (and Demps), but that's just because the tracks, shoes, and technical aspects of sprinting have improved. Jim Brown would still be 6'2, but he'd be 250 (more time in the weight room) and faster (same reason). He'd still be a premier back in the NFL, but mostly due to his superior 'vision', a vastly underrated 'talent' for RBs. The guy that recognizes where the holes are and how they are developing is a great asset.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Dutra » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:40 am

jazzcyclist wrote:If one of today's teams had to go back into the 60's and play just one Sunday by the rules of that day, I think they would be in for a rude awakening despite their size, strength and speed advantage. Between, the stricter pass blocking rules and the defensive linemen wopping them up side the head, the offensive lineman would get called for holding or get their quarterback killed on every play. Furthermore, the receivers would struggle to get open with unrestricted bump-and-run coverage. If Belichick' Patriots only had a week to prepare, my money would be on Lombardi's Packers. Of course, the more games they played, the better they would become until their generational advantages tipped the scales in their favor.



You're bouncing all over the place. Do the current players have the size, strength and speed advantage or not. In some responses you couch your point by stating directly or implying that the players of yesteryear would have all the advantages of today's players and in others you declare that today's players are bigger and stronger, etc and the rules and toughness would even things out.

If your stating that yesterday's players placed in today's society would be the equal athletically of today's players I'd agree with you to some degree. If your stating that their abilities in their own times would remain the same then today's players would absolutely wipe the floor with the old guys.
Dutra
 
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Avante » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:55 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Avante wrote:Would Tarkenton/Staubach out run todays backers....nope!

Why not? Michael Vick is doing the same thing today? Avante, the thing you keep overlooking is the fact that all of the advanatges you point to are generational, not evolutionary. In my hypothetical football games, the generational advantages are completely ignored, since I imagine how things might have been if a specific athlete was born at a different point in time. However, I do consider things like the size of the talent pool and evolution if those factors are relevant to the debate.

Here's a question for you and Marlow. How do you compare folks like Bob Hayes and Jess Owens to today's sprinters? Would they be able to compete with Tyson Gay, Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell if they had been born in the 1980's? I say yes for the same reasons that I say the old time football players would be able to compete, but you might have other ideas?


Jesse Owens was beaten many times in the 100. He was not all that as a sprinter....honest! You can actually make a case for Metcalfe being the better sprinter. Then there's Eulace Peacock. Owens was an amazing long jumper.

Bob Hayes competed against...

Harry Jerome
Roger Sayers
Trenton Jackson
Mel Pender
Gerry Ashworth
Bernie Rivers
Darel Newman
John Moon
Nate Adams
Paul Drayton
Richard Stebbins
Enrique Figuerola

...only Jerome/Figuerola would be considered a great 100 sprinter. Not knocking Bullet Bob. He was a big and powerful as anyone sprinting today. He just wouldn't shine vs the quality of sprinter today like he did back in the day. I do however see him in the mix something I can't say about any of those others not even Jerome.Figuerola. Bullet Bob was head and shoulders above his USA competition.

Bob Hayes and Jim Brown are still talked about when the greats are discussed. They probably could compete vs any era, not that they'd dominate. Jimmy Brown is not running over these guys today like he did those guys back when. He is not blowing by these db's today like he did those db's. He was already big and and fast.
Avante
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:40 am

Avante wrote:Jimmy Brown is not running over these guys today like he did those guys back when. He is not blowing by these db's today like he did those db's. He was already big and and fast.

There's two different questions here.
1. If you time-traveled Jim Brown to today, let him work from pre-season camp on, he'd still be among the league leaders in rushing.
2. If you time-traveled him as a new-born to 1985 and saw him play today at 25, yeah, he'd be THE Man.

If you did the same to Hayes, plopped him intact into a fall 2010 work-out prior to the 2011 season, he'd be right behind Bolt and Gay. Have him born in 1985 and still a pro at 25? He'd be right on Bolt's butt, ahead of Gay.

Athletes today are not only better because of weight training, nutrition, and training techniques today, there's just lots more of them, raised from an earlier age to specialize in A sport.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Avante » Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:53 am

Marlow wrote:
Avante wrote:Jimmy Brown is not running over these guys today like he did those guys back when. He is not blowing by these db's today like he did those db's. He was already big and and fast.

There's two different questions here.
1. If you time-traveled Jim Brown to today, let him work from pre-season camp on, he'd still be among the league leaders in rushing.
2. If you time-traveled him as a new-born to 1985 and saw him play today at 25, yeah, he'd be THE Man.

If you did the same to Hayes, plopped him intact into a fall 2010 work-out prior to the 2011 season, he'd be right behind Bolt and Gay. Have him born in 1985 and still a pro at 25? He'd be right on Bolt's butt, ahead of Gay.

Athletes today are not only better because of weight training, nutrition, and training techniques today, there's just lots more of them, raised from an earlier age to specialize in A sport.



When it comes to Jimmy Brown/Bob Hayes and Tommie Smith it's really hard to do anything disrespectful. They were totally...wow! Those three were just as physically gifted as anyone today, the thing is we can't say that about 95% of those they competed against. MOST....those oldies wouldn't make it today under and scenario/time machine. Jimmy Brown would still be a load, Hayes would still be one of the fastest in the league, Smith would still be...."The Jet" I don't think they would be as awe inspiring as they were however. The competition isn't the same.
Avante
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:32 pm

Avante wrote:When it comes to Jimmy Brown/Bob Hayes and Tommie Smith it's really hard to do anything disrespectful. They were totally...wow! Those three were just as physically gifted as anyone today, the thing is we can't say that about 95% of those they competed against. MOST....those oldies wouldn't make it today under and scenario/time machine. Jimmy Brown would still be a load, Hayes would still be one of the fastest in the league, Smith would still be...."The Jet" I don't think they would be as awe inspiring as they were however. The competition isn't the same.

Dawn of a new age - we totally agree. :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:40 pm

Marlow wrote:1. If you time-traveled Jim Brown to today, let him work from pre-season camp on, he'd still be among the league leaders in rushing.
2. If you time-traveled him as a new-born to 1985 and saw him play today at 25, yeah, he'd be THE Man.


If you did the same to Hayes, plopped him intact into a fall 2010 work-out prior to the 2011 season, he'd be right behind Bolt and Gay. Have him born in 1985 and still a pro at 25? He'd be right on Bolt's butt, ahead of Gay.

That's what I've been saying all along.

    Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
    That saved a wretch like Marlow.
    He once was lost but now is found,
    Was blind, but now he sees.
:wink:
Marlow wrote:Athletes today are not only better because of weight training, nutrition, and training techniques today, there's just lots more of them, raised from an earlier age to specialize in A sport.

Good points! Back in those days, not only did Hayes not have to compete against Caribbean and African sprinters, but the financial incentives in sports is so much greater today than it was in those days. The average NFL football salary was probably not significantly higher than the salary of the average American worker back in Jim Brown's day. Based on the total inflation of 590.23% in the American economy from 1965 to 2010, Jim Brown maximum salary of $75,000 would only be $442,672.50 today. However, the 2010 league minimum for a player with 7-9 years of experience is $760,000! So even with adjustments for inflation, Jim Brown, arguably the greatest player of all-times, made barely half of the league minimum when he played.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:53 pm

Avante wrote:When it comes to Jimmy Brown/Bob Hayes and Tommie Smith it's really hard to do anything disrespectful. They were totally...wow! Those three were just as physically gifted as anyone today, the thing is we can't say that about 95% of those they competed against. MOST....those oldies wouldn't make it today under and scenario/time machine. Jimmy Brown would still be a load, Hayes would still be one of the fastest in the league, Smith would still be...."The Jet" I don't think they would be as awe inspiring as they were however. The competition isn't the same.

I basically agree with this, but I would also add that very few of today's athletes are freaks. Certainly Michael Vick is a freak, but I don't think there's anything exceptional about Peyton Manning or Tom Brady other than they're a little bigger the quarterbacks of Staubach's era due to nutrition and medicine. Julius Peppers is also a freak, but how many of today's athletes fit in his category? 5%? 7%? 10%? The freaks from any era would have been freaks regardless of when they were born.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:56 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
    Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
    That saved a wretch like Marlow.
    He once was lost but now is found,
    Was blind, but now he sees.

My life is complete
Sweet redemption has found me
Nothing is so sweet
As jazzcyclist's amnesty
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:30 am

Another example of a player being punished for violating football's new "don't-hit-too-hard" rule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvFYj7IJn-4
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Avante » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:39 am

Avante
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:54 pm

What's happening to the game I grew up with? I realize that the powers-that-be want to make the game safer and I agree 100% with players who have suffered a concussion being benched until they're cleared by doctors, but something's wrong when the NFL fines Golden Tate for a perfectly clean block. Keep in mind that the referees didn't call a penalty on him. Roger Goodell should just be honest and say they are outlawing hard hits, because if you put someone to sleep, he's going to fine you even if you use textbook form. Here's a link to the video:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/seattle-seaha ... n-Sean-Lee
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:08 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:say they are outlawing hard hits

What do you think the penalty for "unnecessary roughness" is? There was no need for something vicious like that. All the blocker had to do was literally get in his way and the guy couldn't have made the tackle. You see that all the time in downfield blocks: guys just get in the way of would-be tacklers, so they can't catch the ball-carrier. The NFL is in its terminal stages if they can't rein in the injuries caused by head-hunters.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:33 pm

Marlow wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:say they are outlawing hard hits

What do you think the penalty for "unnecessary roughness" is? There was no need for something vicious like that. All the blocker had to do was literally get in his way and the guy couldn't have made the tackle. You see that all the time in downfield blocks: guys just get in the way of would-be tacklers, so they can't catch the ball-carrier. The NFL is in its terminal stages if they can't rein in the injuries caused by head-hunters.

You sound like someone who never played football, because what you preaching goes against everything that's ingrained in football players from the time they're pewees. You're taught to arrive at the scene of impact as fast as you can and to deliver the hit with extreme prejudice, not calibrate your speed based on what you feel is necessary to avoid injuring your target. To do what you ask, we might as well put flags on the players and take the helmets and pads off.

Furthermore, there was no head-hunting by Tate on that play, all the impact was delivered to the chest area, straight out of the textbooks. I actually agree with eliiniating the head-hunting, but that's not what happened on this play. I have a very strong hunch that Goodell wouldn't be throwing around these silly fines if he had ever played football at any level. I hope enough players get tired of these fines to drag him back to court so that he gets his hand slapped by a judge AGAIN before he totally ruins the game.
:(
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Daisy » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:31 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:what you're preaching goes against everything that's ingrained in football players from the time they're pewees.

Interestingly, this is exactly why I have zero interest in american football.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:57 am

Daisy wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:what you're preaching goes against everything that's ingrained in football players from the time they're pewees.

Interestingly, this is exactly why I have zero interest in american football.

I don't watch the pros any more (unless I get a ticket to the Jags game) and my interest in college is due to old school ties. Any game where the idea is to hurt your opponent unnecessarily is not sport. Boxing is on its way out and MMA/UFC is one horrific death away from severe regulation (it'll happen soon).
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Pego » Fri Sep 21, 2012 3:59 am

jazzcyclist wrote:You sound like someone who never played football, because what you preaching goes against everything that's ingrained in football players from the time they're pewees. You're taught to arrive at the scene of impact as fast as you can and to deliver the hit with extreme prejudice, not calibrate your speed based on what you feel is necessary to avoid injuring your target. To do what you ask, we might as well put flags on the players and take the helmets and pads off.


My grandson's 7th grade football season is just about one third done and my observation is that they discourage "unnecessary roughness" right from the start of those football careers. They penalize even "clean" hits when delivered more harsh than necessary to tackle the ball-carrier.

As far as the helmets are concerned, I believe that the current helmet is a major contributing factors to injuries. It should be restructured (softened) to protect the head without being a deadly weapon.
Pego
 
Posts: 10196
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby j-a-m » Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:13 am

Marlow wrote:Boxing is on its way out and MMA/UFC is one horrific death away from severe regulation (it'll happen soon).

Sorry to have to mention this here, but MMA is safer than pole vaulting. So with all due respect, Marlow, better be careful what you wish for. And professional MMA in the U.S. is rather heavily regulated as it is.
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:55 am

j-a-m wrote:
Marlow wrote:Boxing is on its way out and MMA/UFC is one horrific death away from severe regulation (it'll happen soon).

Sorry to have to mention this here, but MMA is safer than pole vaulting. So with all due respect, Marlow, better be careful what you wish for. And professional MMA in the U.S. is rather heavily regulated as it is.

Red herring - no one is trying to injure anyone in PVing. Cheerleading has more injuries than PVing. MMA is NOT safer than PVing, just because there have been PV deaths.
MMA is a savage beat-down between consulting adults. As far as MMA regulation goes, the lack of protective padding and the fact that you can choke someone out, says all it needs to say.

That said, PVing has indeed been discontinued in some areas, as well it should be whenever unsafe conditions (or personnel) exist. I have 'cancelled' the event at away meets (when I withdraw my athletes, I ensure all athletes are stopped).
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby j-a-m » Fri Sep 21, 2012 5:18 am

Marlow wrote:the fact that you can choke someone out, says all it needs to say.

So I assume you're also opposed to the Olympic sport of judo then?
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:41 am

j-a-m wrote:
Marlow wrote:the fact that you can choke someone out, says all it needs to say.

So I assume you're also opposed to the Olympic sport of judo then?

Does the epithet of 'Olympic Sport' preclude criticism? If ckoking out your opponent is a viable tactic, yeah, I've got a problem with it. Is it something you'd recommend for your daughter? "Don't worry, honey, I'm sure she won't accidentally crush your trachea, even though that's kinda the object of the move."

[On the other hand, all three of my kids pole vaulted and now my 9-year-old grandson is doing it. Neither of my two sons ever wanted to try football. Not a word from my wife or me.]
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby j-a-m » Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:37 am

Marlow wrote:even though that's kinda the object of the move."

No, it's not. The general difference is between air chokes (reducing air flow to the lungs) and blood chokes (reducing blood flow to the brain). Air chokes are the ones that pose the danger of injuring the trachea, while blood chokes are the ones that are used in MMA and judo.
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby j-a-m » Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:51 am

jazzcyclist wrote:I have a very strong hunch that Goodell wouldn't be throwing around these silly fines if he had ever played football at any level.

And the question also is, does Roger Goodell have too much power? It seems he can just arbitrarily determine fines and suspensions.
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Fri Sep 21, 2012 11:29 am

j-a-m wrote:Blood chokes are the ones that are used in MMA and judo.

Oh, I feel so much better about it already. Not denying air to lungs, denying blood to the brain . . .
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby j-a-m » Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:07 pm

Marlow wrote:Is it something you'd recommend for your daughter?

It's a fully legitimate sport, and as such I would encourage participation in it.
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby marknhj » Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:32 pm

I was once used in a judo demonstration to demonstrate a choke hold. I was strangled almost into unconsciousness by a local guy, Keith Remfry, who had won silver in the open division at the Montreal Games a month earlier. Most unpleasant and confirmed my decision that being a wussy high jumper was just fine. Ranked up there in unpleasantness with being pinned to the ground at the bottom of a ruck in rugby, being unable to protect my head or goolies with the opposition intent on a bit of afternoon GBH.
marknhj
 
Posts: 5070
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby gh » Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:44 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:..... I have a very strong hunch that Goodell wouldn't be throwing around these silly fines if he had ever played football at any level.....
:(


<<of Buffalo, New York. He graduated from Bronxville High School where, as a three-sport star in football, basketball, and baseball, he captained all three teams as a senior and was named the school's athlete of the year.[5] Injuries kept him from playing college football.[6] ...>>
gh
 
Posts: 46313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby ExCoastRanger » Sat Sep 22, 2012 7:56 pm

marknhj wrote:...goolies....


Oh man -- I am going to find a way to use that word tomorrow even if I have to kick myself in my goolies.
ExCoastRanger
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: North of where I was.

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:24 am

The wussification of the game has reached a new level. How long will it take before this works its way up to high school, college and eventually the pros?

Usually, when a mercy rule becomes a bone of contention it's because the policy isn't instituted soon enough, until after a game is already far out of reach. Yet in one Northern California community the opposite is unfolding, with parents furious about a new rule that they feel is cheating their children and coaches of football and money wasted on fines.

As reported by Sacramento NBC affiliate KCRA, the Northern California Federation Youth Football League (NCFYFL) instituted stiff new penalties for any teams that beat opponents by 35 points or more. Specifically, those teams will be fined $200 and their coaches will be suspended from all league activities for two weeks. The penalty is a drastic change for the league of 7-13 year-olds, which previously issued teams with a warning following such blowouts and required a written description that detailed what the victorious team had done to try and keep scores low.

Similar penalties are occasionally installed by other youth leagues, but they usually don't kick in until the disparity in score between the teams is almost twice as much as the 35 points being used by the NCFYFL.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschoo ... 25382.html

:(
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Daisy » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:30 am

marknhj wrote:Ranked up there in unpleasantness with being pinned to the ground at the bottom of a ruck in rugby, being unable to protect my head or goolies with the opposition intent on a bit of afternoon GBH.

This was exactly why I stopped rugby at about 16, I just got too small for the game. Plus, I couldn't drink enough.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:43 am

jazzcyclist wrote:The wussification of the game has reached a new level.

The easy solution is to go to a running clock as soon as the margin reaches 35 - it just keeps running as it does in soccer, but no added time. The game will be over VERY quickly.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Pego » Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:49 am

jazzcyclist wrote:The wussification of the game has reached a new level. How long will it take before this works its way up to high school, college and eventually the pros?

Usually, when a mercy rule becomes a bone of contention it's because the policy isn't instituted soon enough, until after a game is already far out of reach. Yet in one Northern California community the opposite is unfolding, with parents furious about a new rule that they feel is cheating their children and coaches of football and money wasted on fines.

As reported by Sacramento NBC affiliate KCRA, the Northern California Federation Youth Football League (NCFYFL) instituted stiff new penalties for any teams that beat opponents by 35 points or more. Specifically, those teams will be fined $200 and their coaches will be suspended from all league activities for two weeks. The penalty is a drastic change for the league of 7-13 year-olds, which previously issued teams with a warning following such blowouts and required a written description that detailed what the victorious team had done to try and keep scores low.

Similar penalties are occasionally installed by other youth leagues, but they usually don't kick in until the disparity in score between the teams is almost twice as much as the 35 points being used by the NCFYFL.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschoo ... 25382.html

:(


I never quite understood this American concept that blowouts are unsportsmanlike. I agree that once the win is assured beyond doubt, the coach ought to play second/third stringers. Why should they be restrained?
Pego
 
Posts: 10196
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Daisy » Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:54 am

Pego wrote:Why should they be restrained?

My sons team got absolutely destroyed in soccer last weekend (age 8-9). They didn't seem to mind at all, but I definitely noticed some concern from the bench. So I suspect it's coming from the parents/coaches rather than the players.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby lonewolf » Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:40 pm

Daisy wrote:
Pego wrote:Why should they be restrained?

My sons team got absolutely destroyed in soccer last weekend (age 8-9). They didn't seem to mind at all, but I definitely noticed some concern from the bench. So I suspect it's coming from the parents/coaches rather than the players.

This is interesting.
My two youngest grandsons, 8 and 12, are both playing soccer now. the oldest started playing at age five with the Mighty X-Men team of rejects who compiled a record of over 200 Wins against about 3 losses before being disbanded in a PC move to balance the league. These ordinary little boys developed a "refuse to lose" attitude, perhaps because they were miffed at being last chosen. They had a couple of pretty good little soccer players but so did the other higher seeded teams. They were, of course, much praised by parents and supporters on the sidelines and took their rare losses in stride.
The youngest brother, who is nearly as big as his older brother, started playing last year and I don't think his team has won a game. Nor, do the seem to care.
They get encouragement from the sidelines but "just don't seem to get it" mentally and are lacking in physical skills, individually and collectively.
I don't know where I was going with that except pondering the mystery of different attitudes about winning and losing in a near identical setting.
That and empathy for a little boy playing in the shadow of an older brother.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8814
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Daisy » Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:45 pm

lonewolf wrote:Mighty X-Men team of rejects who compiled a record of over 200 Wins against about 3 losses before being disbanded in a PC move to balance the league.

So I guess we'll never know how they would have taken a big loss. I bet they would have taken it in their stride. As long as the after game snacks were up to scratch!
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Dec 19, 2013 12:09 pm

You know they've gone too far when a punter accuses the NFL of wussifying the game.

Indianapolis Colts punter Pat McAfee says he considers a statement this week by the NFL's head of officials that punters are defenseless players throughout a play to be a setback for players at his position.

McAfee made his comments in a radio interview Thursday on "The Dan Patrick Show," expounding on thoughts on the topic he had previously shared with Yahoo! Sports.

"This defenseless thing, I don't really know what it means. It kind of sets us back a little bit as a position," McAfee said Thursday.

McAfee said punters understand the risks when they're on the field and he doesn't think he's ever been targeted by a player during a return.

Dean Blandino made his comment on NFL Network this week that punters are "defenseless throughout the down" in reference to the vicious hit by Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker Terence Garvin on Cincinnati Bengals punter Kevin Huber during an Antonio Brown touchdown return on Sunday. Blandino said Garvin should have been penalized for the hit, from which Huber suffered a broken jaw and cracked vertebrae. No flag was thrown.

McAfee noted on Wednesday that Huber ventured into the "war zone," an area of 10 or 15 yards that most punters and kickers try to avoid.

"You either have to get in or get out," McAfee said. "I stay behind that area. He was right in the middle of it. I feel bad for him because he's a good friend of mine. I think if you ask him the same question, he would give you the same answer. He knows it's something that could happen, but knows he has to look out next time."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10165 ... el-setback
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby Marlow » Thu Dec 19, 2013 12:19 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:Dean Blandino made his comment on NFL Network this week that punters are "defenseless throughout the down"

Is that true?! I understand they are 'defenseless' during and immediately after the kick, but ferheavensake, when the run-back is in progress, doesn't their job description include - bring down the returner under all circumstances??!!

A former FSU kicker was asked if his goal was to kick it through the end-zone, making every kick unreturnable. His reply, "If I don't, I'll be the guy making the tackle."

Even I agree it's absurd to make the punter 'defenseless' all play.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Roger Staubach Calls Today's Players Wussies

Postby odelltrclan » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:37 pm

How far away from the use of flags are we?!
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 4 guests